Sep 26, 2022 City Commission

[00:00:06]

GOOD AFTERNOON, I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE CITY OF ST

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

WE HAVE A QUORUM.

WE ARE HONORED THIS AFTERNOON TO HAVE PASTOR MARK STURDIVANT FROM CHRIST, OUR SAVIOR EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH, AND WELCOME, PASTOR, AND IF YOU PLEASE RISE FOR THE INVOCATION, REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY VICE MAYOR SIKES-KLINE.

THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION AND THE PEOPLE OF MY CONGREGATION.

ALSO, THANK YOU FOR LEADING OUR CITY IN IMPORTANT MATTERS.

LET US PRAY. HE WHO DWELLS IN THE SHELTER OF THE MOST HIGH WILL ABIDE IN THE SHADOW OF THE ALMIGHTY.

I WILL SAY TO THE LORD, MY REFUGE AND MY FORTRESS, YOU ARE MY GOD IN WHOM I TRUST, FOR HE WILL DELIVER YOU FROM THE SNARE OF THE FOULER AND FROM THE DEADLY PESTILENCE.

HE WILL COVER YOU WITH HIS FEATHERS AND UNDER HIS WINGS.

YOU WILL FIND REFUGE, FOR HE WILL COMMAND HIS ANGELS CONCERNING YOU TO GUARD YOU IN ALL YOUR WAYS.

ON THEIR HANDS, THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP LEST YOU STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE, BECAUSE HE HOLDS FAST TO ME IN LOVE.

I WILL DELIVER HIM.

I WILL PROTECT HIM BECAUSE HE KNOWS MY NAME.

WHEN HE CALLS TO ME, I WILL ANSWER HIM.

I WILL BE WITH HIM IN TROUBLE.

I WILL RESCUE HIM AND HONOR HIM WITH LONG LIFE.

I WILL SATISFY HIM AND SHOW HIM MY SALVATION.

LORD JESUS, OUR SALVATION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR GREAT PROMISE, NOT ONLY FOR OUR ETERNAL RESCUE, BUT FOR THE PROTECTION OF YOUR HOLY ANGELS, FOR WHICH WE ASK.

AS THIS WEEK, WE PREPARE FOR AN UPCOMING STORM, BUT NOT WITH FEAR, BUT WITH RESPONSIBILITY AND WITH CONFIDENCE THAT YOU WILL PROTECT US FROM ALL THINGS AND WILL NEVER LEAVE US, NOR FORSAKE US.

WE PRAY ALSO NOW FOR THESE LEADERS OF OUR CITY THAT THEY MAY BE BLESSED BY YOUR PRESENCE WITH THEM TODAY, AND THAT ALL THEIR MATTERS MAY BE AN OUTREACH OF YOUR BENEVOLENCE TOWARD US.

FOR YOU, OH, LORD JESUS, LIVE AND RAIN WITH GOD, THE FATHER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT.

ONE GOD, NOW AND FOREVER.

AMEN. PLEASE JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PASTOR STURDIVANT.

COMMISSIONERS YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU THE REGULAR AGENDA.

[2. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS]

MR. MAYOR. COMMISSIONERS.

GOOD EVENING. WE WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST TWO MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA.

ONE IS AN ITEM OF GREAT IMPORTANCE, WHICH WOULD BE A STATUS REPORT OF THE PENDING STORM AND WHERE WE ARE AND WHAT OUR MESSAGING IS AT THE MOMENT, AND THEN SECONDLY, A RESOLUTION THAT IS A RESOLUTION THAT WE PASS THAT ALLOWS US TO PICK UP YARD DEBRIS ON PRIVATE ROADS, HIGHWAYS SUCH AS PELICAN REEF, MADEIRA, ANASTASIA LAKES, LIONS GATE AND OTHERS.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE OFTEN DO AFTER A STORM, BUT WE'D LIKE TO DO IT AHEAD SO THAT WE CAN MAKE OUR CLEANUP SEAMLESS, AND THOSE ARE TWO REQUESTED MODIFICATIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER CHANGES OR MODIFICATIONS TO THE AGENDA? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF? I MOVE TO APPROVE.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. THE AGENDA IS MOVED, SO WE'LL MOVE THE REPORT ON STORM PREPARATIONS TO ITEM 7B AND WE WILL MOVE THE RESOLUTION CONCERNING DEBRIS REMOVAL TO ITEM 9B.

[4. PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS OR FOR AGENDA ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARING]

WE WOULD ASK THAT YOU COMPLETE A COMMENT CARD.

I DO HAVE TWO.

I'M HAPPY TO RECEIVE ANY OTHERS.

AT THIS POINT, I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS THAT WISH TO SPEAK TO UNDER GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS.

[00:05:03]

SO, MISS KALAIDI, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE READY FOR YOU.

BJ KALAIDI WEST CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE 8 NEWCOMB DESTROYING WELCOME SIGNS, THEN BUILDING A GARAGE AT US ONE AND KING STREET ACROSS FROM A POT BUSINESS CONTINUES TO DESTROY THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE.

AS LONG AS POLITICIANS AND BUREAUCRATS IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE DO NOT LIVE NEXT TO AND IGNORE HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES THAT EXIST IN THE CITY LIMITS OF ST AUGUSTINE, SUCH AS 12 NEWCOMB ST, THE CITY WILL BECOME KNOWN MORE AND MORE AS TRASH BILL ON NOVEMBER EIGHT. PLEASE VOTE NO SALES TAX INCREASE.

THE COUNTY IS NOW CHANGING.

WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THIS TAX? [INAUDIBLE] IF THIS PASSES, THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE WILL RECEIVE 2.98 MILLION TAX DOLLARS TO SPEND. NO ONE HAS ANY IDEA WHAT THE PLAN IS.

WHY HAS THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE BEEN SILENT ABOUT THEIR CUT, JUST AS THEY HAVE BEEN SILENT ABOUT THE 8% RAISE FOR 386 EMPLOYEES? THERE IS SHENANIGANS, NOT TRANSPARENCY, WITH OUR PROPERTY TAX AND OTHER TAX DOLLARS.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY CAN SEE THIS SIGN.

HERE WE GO.

SHAME. [INAUDIBLE] IN THE PLAZA AND ANYONE WANTS TO KNOW WHAT THAT IS ABOUT.

I WILL CONTINUE TO WEAR IT SINCE 2009 AND I HAVE PICTURES TO SHOW WHAT GOES ON IN THE PLAZA DOWNTOWN ST AUGUSTINE, AND I FEEL THIS WAY VERY STRONGLY, AND I THINK SOME OTHER PEOPLE FEEL THIS WAY, TOO.

OOPS, CELL PHONES TURN THEM OFF.

RESPECT DOES NOT EXIST IN THIS CITY, AND WHENEVER WE AS THE PUBLIC COME INTO THESE MEETINGS AND YOU TALK WITH SOME OF YOUR PEOPLE THAT COME TO THIS PODIUM, YOU KNOW, IGNORE THE OTHERS THAT'S TELLING US WHAT YOU THINK OF THE PUBLIC, AND IT'S NOT VERY NICE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION DURING GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? I HAVE NO OTHER CARDS.

I DO NOT SEE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE AND THEREFORE I WILL CLOSE THE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION.

COMMISSIONERS, YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU UNDER ITEM FIVE, THE CONSENT AGENDA.

[5. CONSENT AGENDA]

MOTION BY THE VICE MAYOR OR SECOND BY COMMISSIONER BLONDER? MADAM CLERK, IF YOU'D PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THE CONSENT AGENDA IS APPROVED.

[INAUDIBLE] MAYOR, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ THE CONSENT AGENDA? YES, I CERTAINLY WOULD.

THE FOLLOWING ORDINANCES ARE TENTATIVELY SCHEDULED FOR SECOND READING ON OCTOBER 10TH, 2022, ORDINANCE 2022-03 ORDINANCE 2022-28 OR IN ITS 2022-29. WE HAVE A REMINDER OF UPCOMING MEETINGS, INCLUDING OCTOBER 10TH, 2022 5 P.M..

REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 24TH, 2022 5 P.M.

REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING NOVEMBER 14, 2022 5 P.M.

REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING.

WE HAVE APPROVAL MINUTES FROM PRIOR COMMISSION MEETINGS.

AUGUST 18, 2022 SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 22, 2022 REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2022 SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING.

WE HAVE RELEASED A LEAN FOR UNIT CONNECTION FEE MORTGAGES AT 2855 NORTH FIFTH STREET.

CLAYTON WEAVER 76 LINCOLN STREET.

JOHN [INAUDIBLE].

WE HAVE A RELEASE OF CODE ENFORCEMENT LIEN AT 47 ABBOTT STREET.

WE HAVE RATIFICATION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS OF ST AUGUSTINE, ADDING THE JUNETEENTH HOLIDAY AND ADJUSTING VACATION ACCRUALS.

WE HAVE RATIFICATION OF THE REVISED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE COASTAL FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, CLARIFYING WHEN OVERTIME WILL BE PAID DUE TO MANDATORY TRAINING AND ELIMINATED ELIMINATED THE SCHEDULED HOURS FOR OFFICERS WORKING IN INVESTIGATIONS.

WE HAVE THE AUGUST 2022 FINANCIAL UPDATE.

[00:10:01]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. REGAN, AND I'M SORRY THAT I FAILED TO HAVE YOU READ THAT BEFORE THE COMMISSION VOTED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, BUT NOW THE PUBLIC IS FULLY ADVISED, EVEN THOUGH, OF COURSE, IT'S PART OF OUR PUBLISHED AGENDA, AND SO WE HAVE ALREADY APPROVED THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT MR. REGAN JUST READ.

WE'RE NOW ON ITEM 7B A PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY MANAGER CONCERNING PREPARATIONS FOR THE UPCOMING STORM.

[7.B. Items of Great Public Importance]

AS WE'RE AWARE, WE HAVE A STORM BEARING DOWN ON FLORIDA, A HURRICANE, AND AS OF THE 115 SPECIFIC NOAA BRIEFING ON THE WEATHER CONDITIONS, WE ARE ADVISING OUR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES, OUR COMMUNITY TO PREPARE FOR FLOODING LIKE IRMA OF 2017.

SO THAT MEANS THAT THERE ARE DOZENS AT HOME THAT ARE IN HARM'S WAY.

WE EXPECT THAT IN LOW LYING AREAS SUCH AS SOUTH DAVIS SHORES, THE WATER CAN BE THREE FEET ABOVE THE ASPHALT.

SO PEOPLE NEED TO BE PREPARING AT THE SCALE OF HURRICANE IRMA, AND SO THERE ARE TWO VERY IMPORTANT RESIDENTIAL SERVICES. THE FIRST IS THAT STARTING TOMORROW AT FRANCES FIELD, WE WILL HAVE A SANDBAGGING OPERATION COMMENCING AT NOON SO THAT RESIDENCES AND BUSINESSES CAN OBTAIN UP TO 20 SANDBAGS PER RESIDENCE OR BUSINESS, AND THEN SECONDLY, WE ARE OPENING FREE OF CHARGE AT 8 A.M.

THE GARAGE SO THAT RESIDENTS THAT NEED TO PUT VEHICLES ON HIGH GROUND CAN PARK IN THE PARKING STRUCTURE, AND THE KEY THINGS ARE THAT WITH THE HIGH TIDES, THE NORTHEASTERLY PATTERNS, WE ARE ALSO PROJECTED TO HAVE BETWEEN TEN AND 15 INCHES OF RAIN.

SO WITH THOSE HIGH TIDES, THEN THE RAIN CAN'T DRAIN.

SO THAT'S PART OF THE EXACERBATION OF THE HEAVY FLOODING.

IT COULD BE HIGHER.

WE COULD HAVE GUSTS AT HURRICANE LEVELS.

WE ALSO CAN HAVE TORNADOES.

THE WE WILL CONTINUE TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITY APPRIZED WITH EACH AND EVERY UPDATE.

TOMORROW IN THE LATE MORNING, THERE'LL BE SOME DECISIONS MADE REGARDING SCHOOL CLOSURES AND OTHER TOPICS THAT ARE CRITICAL. SO WE EXPECT MORE INFORMATION TO BE COMING OUT SHORTLY TOMORROW AFTERNOON, AND THE LONG AND SHORT OF IT IS WHAT I DESCRIBED IS BASED ON THE CONDITIONS AS OF DESCRIBED TO US AT 1:15 TODAY, EASTERLY SHIFTS OF THE STORM COULD EXACERBATE THE CONDITIONS ABOVE WHAT I JUST DESCRIBED AND A WESTERLY SHIFT CAN TAKE THOSE CONDITIONS DOWN.

SO WE ARE WORKING ALL COMMUNICATION CHANNELS TO PROVIDE INFORMATION, INCLUDING THE TRADITIONAL PRINT MEDIA, ALL OF OUR SOCIAL MEDIA CHANNELS NEXT DOOR BETWEEN THE BRIDGES AND VERBAL COMMUNICATIONS WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS.

SO THIS IS NOT A MINOR EVENT THAT WE WILL EXPERIENCE.

THE WEATHER WILL BEGIN TO DETERIORATE, PARTICULARLY ON WEDNESDAY, WITH HIGHER WINDS AND RAINS.

SO WE'RE ADVISING RESIDENTS TO MAKE YOUR PREPARATIONS TOMORROW AND IN THE EARLIER PART OF WEDNESDAY, AND THE WORST FLOODING WILL BE ON THURSDAY AND FRIDAY AS THE RAINFALL CONTINUES TO ACCUMULATE AND WATER IS PUSHED DEEPER INTO THE ESTUARIES.

SO THAT'S THE INFORMATION THAT I WANTED TO CONVEY TO YOU THIS EVENING, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY IS THAT I KNOW THAT WE ARE ALL PLUGGED INTO THE DIFFERENT COMMUNICATIONS CHANNELS OF THE CITY, SO PLEASE BE SURE TO MULTIPLY OUT AND SHARE INFORMATION FROM YOUR WEBSITES OR FROM YOUR FACEBOOK PAGES OR INSTAGRAM TO HELP GET THAT MESSAGE ACROSS, AND WE HAVE BEEN FIELDING A NUMBER OF PHONE CALLS AND EMAILS FROM RESIDENCES, AND THE PRIME FOCUS IS SANDBAGS AND PARKING, AND WITH THAT, I CONCLUDE MY REPORT, AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR SPECIFICS, I ALSO HAVE CHIEF AVILES HERE THAT CAN ADDRESS ANY QUESTION THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE AS WELL AS MYSELF.

COMMISSIONERS, ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? ONE QUESTION. YOU SAID THE GARAGE WOULD BE OPEN AT 8 A.M..

[00:15:01]

WEDNESDAY MORNING. WEDNESDAY.

I'M SORRY IF I WASN'T CLEAR.

THANK YOU.

AND THE GARAGE IS ALWAYS OPEN.

IT'S JUST FREE OF CHARGE BEGINNING WEDNESDAY MORNING.

I WOULD JUST ALSO ASK YOU TO JUST BRIEFLY GIVE US AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT CITY STAFF TYPICALLY DOES, LIKE PUBLIC WORKS AND SO FORTH IN PREPARATION.

THE VICE MAYOR MENTIONED THAT SHE SAW THE VACUUM TRUCK IN HER NEIGHBORHOOD.

I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LET PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT JUST SITTING BACK AND WAITING FOR THIS TO COME AT US, BUT THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY DOING THINGS TO MITIGATE.

SO ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR STORM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS WORK AS THEY'RE DESIGNED.

SO OUR STAFF FOCUSES ON MAKING SURE THAT GRATES ARE CLEAR AND THAT BOXES ARE CLEAR.

LINES ARE CLEAR.

THE [INAUDIBLE] TRUCK IS A MAJOR PIECE OF EQUIPMENT FOR THAT SERVICE, MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO STAY ON SCHEDULE WITH VEGETATION PICKUPS.

WE DO QUITE A BIT OF EMERGENCY PLANNING.

WE, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'VE RUN TESTS ON ALL THE GENERATORS.

IT GETS FAIRLY EXTENSIVE.

WE TOP OFF ALL OF OUR FUELS.

WE HAVE A FUEL MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR OUR FLEET THAT WE HAVE ABOUT 20 VEHICLES THAT ARE IN THE BACK FOR STAFF.

WE RELOCATE THOSE VEHICLES TO THE WATER PLANT SO THAT THEY'RE READY FOR SERVICE.

WE'RE REMOVING OUR PARKING METERS ON THE BAY FRONT.

WE'RE SANDBAGGING AND SHORING UP BUILDINGS THAT WE KNOW ARE TROUBLESOME, BUT ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE DO IS THAT AT THE WASTEWATER PLANT, WE HAVE FLOOD WALLS, FLOOD DAMS. THE WASTEWATER PLANT IS VERY HARDENED SO THAT IT STAYS IN SERVICE THROUGHOUT THE STORM, AND THAT'S A MAJOR SITUATION.

WE WORK WITH OUR CONTRACTORS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR SITES AS SECURE AS THEY CAN MAKE IT.

THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THE FEMA 13 LIFT STATION THAT WE TALK ABOUT, THAT IS REALLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PROJECT THAT HELPS OUR RESILIENCY TO NOT LOSE SEWAGE CONVEYANCE DURING THE STORM.

PERHAPS CHIEF AVILES MIGHT WANT TO SHARE A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT WE DO THAT I PROBABLY HAVE OVERLOOKED.

WELCOME, CHIEF. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, I THINK THE CITY MANAGER TOUCHED ON EVERYTHING.

I WILL UPDATE YOU THE SINCE THE 1:00 THE 5:00 ADVISORY IS OUT.

WE DID HAVE A SMALL SHIFT TO THE EAST, WHICH IS NOT WHAT WE WERE HOPING FOR AND THAT THE AREA IS CURRENTLY UNDER A TROPICAL STORM WATCH AND A STORM SURGE WATCH.

SO THAT IS NEW INFORMATION AS OF 5:00 TODAY, WHICH SHOULD JUST SERVE AS A REMINDER TO ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS TO HEED THOSE WARNINGS FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS, FROM OUR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PARTNERS, THAT WE ARE LIKELY TO BE IMPACTED FROM THIS STORM, THAT IT'S NOT JUST A CITY EVENT, BUT THAT THOSE FOLKS THAT ARE WELL INLAND ALONG THE RIVER FACE SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES HERE AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE NEXT FEW DAYS.

YES, COMMISSIONER BLONDER.

THANK YOU, CHIEF. I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

OVER THE PAST YEAR OR MORE SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE COMMISSION, I'VE HEARD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE RAISE THE ISSUE OF THE GAWKERS THAT COME IN AFTERWARDS AND PLOW DOWN PEOPLE'S STREETS.

I KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT'S CAUSED THE FLOODING IN MY GARAGE DURING IRMA, SO I KNOW IT TOO WELL, AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT IS BEING PREPARED IN ORDER SO THAT PEOPLE, RESIDENTS CAN CALL SOMEBODY I'M NOT SURE WHO AND ASK FOR SOME SIGNS OR SOME HELP WITH THAT.

SO WE DEPLOYED BARRICADE.

WE KNOW THE MAIN STREETS WHERE THIS IS A PROBLEM, AND SO WE DEPLOY BARRICADES IN THOSE STREETS AND WE STATIONED AS MUCH TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE THAT WE CAN WITH POLICE OFFICERS TO CONTROL VEHICLES CAUSING A WAKE.

ONE ONE GOOD THING IS THAT COQUINA, WHICH IS A HISTORICALLY ONE OF THE WORST STREETS, THE ROAD IS CLOSED BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION ON THE STATION 52. SO THAT'S HELPFUL.

SO A LOT OF THE RESOURCES THAT WE WOULD NORMALLY USE ON THAT STREET CAN NOW BE REDEPLOYED IN THE CITY, BUT THE I WILL SAY IT'S I'VE HEARD DIFFERENT RUMORS.

LET US CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND YOU CAN CALL US AT 825-1070, BUT IT'S BEST TO LET US ENGAGE WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE CAUSING THIS AS COMPARED TO RESIDENTS THAT JUST ARE SO FRUSTRATED THAT IT CAN GET OUT OF HAND AND WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL HOW WE DEAL WITH PEOPLE, BUT IF YOU LIVE ON A STREET WHERE THAT HAS BEEN A HISTORIC PROBLEM, THAT'S WHY SANDBAGS ARE VERY

[00:20:07]

SO IF YOU'RE WORRIED ABOUT IT, WE DO HAVE A PLAN, BUT ALSO TAKE ACTION ON YOUR OWN DOORS.

I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING SOUTH STREET.

THAT'S A STREET THAT NEEDS TO STAY OPEN BECAUSE OF BAYVIEW.

ELDERLY PEOPLE AT BAYVIEW, I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BARRICADE THAT.

SO WHAT IS THE PLAN ON THAT SIGNAGE TO ASK PEOPLE TO SLOW DOWN OR BECAUSE THEY THEY DEFINITELY SPEED THROUGH THERE? WE HAVE SIGNAGE, SLOW, NO WAKE AND WE'VE MADE MORE SIGNS, AND YOU ACTUALLY BRING UP A REALLY GOOD POINT.

THE PUBLIC ARE OUR BEST EYES AND EARS, AND YOU ARE OFTEN WHO THE PUBLIC GOES TO ABOUT SOME STREETS THAT MAYBE NOT BE ON OUR RADAR.

SOUTH STREET IS ON OUR RADAR, SO WE'LL BE DEPLOYING SOME DIFFERENT SIDES SIGNS.

THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT A LOT OF THE WORK THAT WE DID ON THE BAYFRONT DOES KEEP AVENIDA MENENDEZ OPEN.

SO WE'LL WATCH BOTH STREETS, AND IF WE HAVE TO CLOSE SOUTH STREET, WE WILL AND WE CAN REROUTE, BUT AGAIN, YOU'RE THE BEST.

THE PUBLIC ARE OUR BEST EYES AND EARS.

AND PLEASE LET US KNOW OF ANY COMPLAINTS THAT COME IN SO WE CAN REDEPLOY RESOURCES.

YES, I HAVE YOUR NUMBER.

THANK YOU. YES, I HAVE SOMETHING.

IT'S STORM SURGE.

BIG DEAL. WE TEND TO REPORT IT IN A VAGUE WAY.

X NUMBER OF FEET ABOVE THE GROUND.

THE GROUND CAN VARY DRAMATICALLY.

I MEAN, THIS [INAUDIBLE] GOES FROM ANYWHERE FROM FIVE FEET UP TO TEN, 12, 14, 15 FEET IN SOME AREAS, AND I FIND IT JUST TOTALLY MYSTIFIED WHY WE CONTINUE TO THROW OUT THESE VAGUE THINGS X NUMBER OF FEET ABOVE THE GROUND WHEN WE HAVE A PERFECTLY GOOD WAY OF REPRESENTING STORM SURGE.

IT'S CALLED BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

EVERY HOUSE HAS AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE.

IF THEY HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE, WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT WOULD BE IN JEOPARDY, THEY HAVE AN ELEVATION CERTIFICATE THAT STATES EXACTLY WHAT YOUR ELEVATION IS, EITHER IN GVD OR NAVD, WHY THE WEATHER CHANNEL AND THE WEATHER SERVICES PERSIST AND NOT USING A MORE EXACT DESIGNATION BECAUSE A FOOT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE, AND YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SEE THE CITY AT LEAST WE CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT HOW WE REPORT IT.

YOU KNOW, DAVIS SHORES SIX FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL, MOST OF IT, THREE FEET ABOVE THE GROUND, THAT'S A NINE FOOT STORM SURGE.

MATTHEW IS 8.5.

THAT'S NOT RIGHT.

IT'S WRONG. IF WE SIMPLY SAID STORM SURGE IS GOING TO BE 7.5 AND NAVD, EVERYONE WOULD LOOK AT THEIR ELEVATION CERTIFICATE AND GO, GEE, I'M IN HARM'S WAY OR WAIT A MINUTE, I'M OKAY, MAYBE, BUT THIS HAS A LOT TO DO WITH PLANNING AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND ALL THE NOODLES AND EVERYTHING WE GO THROUGH, BUT WE CAN'T USE SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN IN USE SINCE 1928 TO CALL OUT SPECIFICALLY WHAT TO EXPECT AND YEAH, I'M SORRY.

COMMISSIONER VALDES I COULDN'T AGREE WITH YOU MORE ABOUT THE WAY THAT THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE HAS DONE SOME REPORTING EVEN TO THOSE TRAINED IN STORM WATER.

IT'S CONFUSING.

I WILL ALSO SAY THAT WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON NOW TO DEAL WITH THIS, WE HAVE IN PRODUCTION BASED ON RECENT THE FORECAST A MAP THAT IS THAT WE CAN GIVE YOU THAT WILL TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW HIGH TO EXPECT THE WATER IN YOUR ON YOUR STREET.

SO WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS SAYING THERE'S THE ROAD, THE WATER IS GOING TO BE THERE RIGHT HERE, AND NOT THE CONFUSING WAY THAT IT'S REPORTED , AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT.

WHILE MANY OF US ARE FAMILIAR WITH OUR FLOOD CERTIFICATES AND SO FORTH, MANY PEOPLE MAY NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION SO DIRECTLY ON THEIR FLOOR ELEVATION. THAT'S WHY TRYING TO MAKE IT REAL IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, OVER THE ASPHALT.

SO WE'RE WORKING ON A MAP TO CONVEY THAT, AND IN THE CRITICAL NEIGHBORHOODS, WE WILL BE HAVING STAFF PRESENT, KNOCKING ON DOORS AND REMINDING PEOPLE ABOVE ALL OF THE ISSUES OF TECHNOLOGY AND OF COURSE, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO ALSO ARE CONVEYING IS THAT WATCH YOUR LOCAL NEWS, WATCH YOUR WEATHER CHANNEL, WATCH YOUR TRUSTED NEWS SOURCE ON THESE THINGS.

WE HAVE FOUND THAT PEOPLE JUST DON'T WATCH THE NEWS, AND THE TRUTH IS, THAT'S USUALLY THE BEST SOURCE TO HELP YOU GET THROUGH STORMS. OKAY, FINAL COMMENTS, COMMISSIONERS.

MS. WISSEL.

[00:25:01]

WE HAVE A PRESS RELEASE READY TO GO OUT AS SOON AS I WALK OUT OF HERE.

IT'LL GO OUT THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT THE PARKING GARAGE, AS WELL AS THE SANDBAG OPERATIONS.

I GOT AN EMAIL JUST A LITTLE BIT AGO FROM ONE OF OUR GIS GUYS.

JEREMY HAS PUT TOGETHER AN INTERACTIVE MAP THAT ACTUALLY SHOWS THOSE ELEVATION LEVELS THAT YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT.

SO ONCE WE MAKE SURE THAT IT'S WORKING AND THE I'S ARE DOTTED AND THE TEASER CROSSED WE WILL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A LINK TO THAT AVAILABLE AS WELL.

THE MESSAGING COMMISSIONER BLONDER YOU MENTIONED ABOUT THE WAKING IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

PART OF THE OVERARCHING MESSAGE THAT WE'LL PUT OUT TODAY IS A GENERAL MESSAGE ABOUT ALL OF THESE THINGS, AND THEN OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS, WE'LL SEND VERY SPECIFIC MESSAGES THAT PULL OUT EACH OF THOSE POINTS AND ONE OF THEM IS WATCHING WHERE YOU'RE DRIVING NOT TO DRIVE THROUGH THOSE STANDING WATER.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE DO THE BEST THAT WE CAN TO PUT THAT MESSAGE OUT.

WE'LL PUT SOME OTHER INFORMATION OUT SPECIFICALLY IN NEXT DOOR, BECAUSE WE FIND THAT WE'RE GETTING A LOT OF RESIDENTS COMMUNICATING THROUGH NEXT DOOR, AND WE ALSO HAVE AN ALERT TOOL IN FACEBOOK FOR ALL FOUR OF OUR PLATFORMS NOW THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY POST SOMETHING AS AN EMERGENCY.

SO IT AUTOMATICALLY DISTRIBUTES TO A GEOGRAPHIC AREA, NOT JUST IT'S A MUCH MORE SOPHISTICATED PIECE OF OF TECHNOLOGY THAT FACEBOOK HAS PUT TOGETHER FOR EMERGENCY ALERT.

SO IT'S NOT JUST A POST.

IT ACTUALLY GOES OUT AS AN ALERT.

SO WE'LL BE USING THAT AS WELL.

VERY GOOD. JUST TWO COMMENTS.

ONE IS WE HAVE CONSTRUCTION SIGNS ALL THROUGH THE COCONUT AVENUE AREA THEY'RE LAYING ON THE GROUND ASSOCIATED WITH REWORKING THEIR COQUINA CREEK.

WE HAVE THE SAME THING AT [INAUDIBLE].

SO I WOULD BE VERY GRATEFUL IF WE CAN GET THOSE PICKED UP AND SECURED AND PRIOR TO THE STORM, BUT THEY'VE BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME.

THE OTHER I WOULD JUST POINT OUT IS AS A GENERAL POINT OF INFORMATION IS BY AND CORRECT ME EITHER CHIEF OR MR. REGAN, IF I'M INCORRECT BY, INNER-LOCAL AGREEMENT.

BOTH MUNICIPALITIES AND THE COUNTY WORKED VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER THROUGHOUT ANY TYPE OF NATURAL WEATHER EVENT, AND THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, MR. HUNTER CONRAD, IS THE DE FACTO HEAD OF THE COUNTY FOR ALL OF THESE ISSUES.

SO WE HAVE A VERY HIGH LEVEL OF COORDINATION ACROSS ALL OF OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT, OUR FIRE PROTECTION AND OTHER PUBLIC SERVICES AND I THINK THAT'S A TREMENDOUS BENEFIT TO ALL THE RESIDENTS OF ST JOHN'S COUNTY , BUT TO THE CITY IN PARTICULAR.

I'M SORRY.

I WAS GOING TO BRING THIS UP UNDER THE COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS, BUT I THINK IT'S BETTER HERE.

I RECEIVED THIS IN THE MAIL OVER THE WEEKEND.

IT'S FROM THE CITY, AND IT'S A FLOOD PROTECTION INFORMATION, AND IT COVERS TOPICS LIKE FLOOD HAZARDS, FLOOD INSURANCE, FLOOD SAFETY, DRAINAGE SYSTEM, MAINTENANCE, WARNING SYSTEMS. WHO DO YOU CALL AND WHAT DO YOU DO? SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY IT WAS VERY GOOD TIMING AND I APPRECIATE THIS VERY MUCH.

HOWEVER, I DID RECEIVE TWO COPIES, SO WE'LL PROBABLY NEED TO WORK THROUGH THAT.

I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT HAPPENED, BUT I GUESS MAYBE A LITTLE GLITCH IN THE SYSTEM, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY WORTH READING.

IF PEOPLE HAPPEN TO SEE THIS AND SEE IT LAYING IN THEIR MAIL PILE, IT'S DEFINITELY WORTH A READ AND TO SAVE.

IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE IT HAS A REALLY GOOD SHELF LIFE.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING TO HAVE ON A WEBSITE, THAT PARTICULAR DOCUMENT.

THANK YOU. OKAY, ANYTHING FURTHER? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. REGAN AND CHIEF AND MELISSA.

MS. WISSEL, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE NOW ON ITEM 7C1 A DISCUSSION CONCERNING FLAGLER CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

[7.C.1. Discussion of Flagler Crossing Development Agreement whereby the applicant proposed to build an additional 180 units on the eastern portion of the property to include 50 units as "affordable" which can be distributed throughout the entire project. (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

YES, GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS AMY SKINNER.

I'M THE DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THIS ITEM IS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS FLAGLER CROSSING.

THE CITY COMMISSION REVIEWED AND DISCUSSED A PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN, AMENDMENT AND REZONING FOR APPROXIMATELY 42 ACRES SOUTH OF SAN SEBASTIAN VIEW AND EAST OF THE SAN SEBASTIAN RIVER.

[00:30:02]

THE APPLICANT AGREED TO SOME PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS THE MECHANISM DETERMINED TO PROVIDE SOME GUARANTEE IN THE PROVISION OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS AND A WAY FOR THE CITY TO MONITOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE UNITS OVER TIME.

BUILDING PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED FOR 11 BUILDINGS WITH 330 UNITS.

THIS IS NEAR THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS ALLOWED FOR EIGHT UNITS AN ACRE, WHICH IS THE EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO CHANGE THE LAND USE AND ZONING TO ALLOW 16 UNITS PER ACRE, AND PROPOSES TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL 180 UNITS, 50 OF WHICH WOULD BE AFFORDABLE.

THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS COULD BE DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.

IF THE REQUESTS ARE GRANTED, THE PROJECT WOULD CONTAIN 510 TOTAL UNITS.

APPROXIMATELY 10% OF THE UNITS WOULD BE CONSIDERED AFFORDABLE WITH THE PROVISION OF THE 50 AFFORDABLE UNITS.

OVERALL, 510 PROPOSED UNITS FOR FLAGLER CROSSING CALCULATES TO APPROXIMATELY 12 UNITS PER ACRE.

ACCORDING TO THE DATA AND ANALYSIS OF THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE CITY IS PROJECTED TO NEED AT LEAST 3400 ADDITIONAL HOUSING UNITS BY 2040 WHICH INCLUDES 577 SPECIFICALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS BY 2040.

THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA ACTUALLY PROJECTS THE CITY'S POPULATION TO BE ABOUT 19,000 BY 2040.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

IT REQUIRES TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, TONIGHT'S MEETING AND A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING, WHICH IS SCHEDULED TO BE MONDAY, OCTOBER 10TH AT 5:00 PM IN THIS ALCAZAR ROOM AT 75 KING STREET.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM AVAILABLE.

SO THANK YOU, MS. SKINNER, AND THEN LATER IN THE MEETING, WE HAVE A FIRST READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

YES, THIS IS AN AMENDED ORDINANCE FOR THE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT RELATED TO FLAGLER CROSSING.

IT IS AMENDED BECAUSE BASED ON THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WE CHANGED THE SHORT TITLE.

IT ADDS A REFERENCE TO A CONDITION FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND WE ADDED AN ASTERISKS LANGUAGE FOR THE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CLARIFY THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS REQUIRED BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IF APPROVED AND THE AND THE COVENANT ATTACHED TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS, MS. SKINNER? IF THERE ARE NONE, PLEASE.

ACTUALLY, IT MIGHT BE FOR OUR ATTORNEY.

IF THESE ARE RENTAL UNITS, IS THERE ANY WAY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T GO TO CONDOMINIUM AT SOME POINT? THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE COVENANT AND IT IS DISCUSSED IN IT.

I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, THOUGH, THAT WE DO HAVE THE ATTORNEY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

YES, MS. STACEY RUIZ ISN'T IN THE ROOM, SO I DIDN'T WANT US TO JUMP OVER.

I DON'T KNOW IF SHE HAS A PARTICULAR PRESENTATION.

FORGIVE ME, I DIDN'T HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK.

MISS RUIZ, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A PRESENTATION? YOU'RE CERTAINLY WELCOME TO.

STACEY RUIZ. 1 INDEPENDENT DR #1200 JACKSONVILLE, 32202 [INAUDIBLE], I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS AND PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW IF YOU'D LIKE WHATEVER THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION, AND DO CAN YOU ANSWER THAT QUESTION ABOUT LONG TERM? THE COVENANT THAT IS REQUIRED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS DOING TWO THINGS.

MAINLY, THE FIRST IS ASSURING THAT ALL 180 UNITS THAT ARE WHAT I WOULD CALL THE ADDITIONAL UNITS FOR THIS PROJECT THAT ARE A RESULT OF NEEDING THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT WILL REMAIN FOR RENT THROUGH THE LIFE OF THIS OF THE COVENANT, WHICH IS 80 YEARS.

THE SECOND ITEM IS TO ENSURE THAT 50 OF THOSE UNITS WILL REMAIN WILL BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS DEFINED IN THE COVENANT, WHICH IS 85% OF THE FLORIDA FINANCE HOUSING AUTHORITY PROGRAM, AND IT WILL BE MEASURED AS A RENTAL PRODUCT AS WELL AS THE INCOME.

SO NOT ANYBODY CAN JUST COME IN AND GET A REDUCED RENT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

[00:35:01]

I HAVE A COMMENT, ACTUALLY, A QUESTION.

I'M AND I MAY JUST BE MISUNDERSTANDING HOW THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE COVENANT WORK TOGETHER, BUT WHAT I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY, MS. SKINNER, IS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS, AT LEAST IN PART, MEANT TO ENABLE THE CITY TO MONITOR THE COMPLIANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITH THE COVENANT.

RIGHT. YES, AND THAT'S GOING TO BE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS BASED ON THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

YES. IF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ONLY GOES OUT 30 YEARS, THOUGH, AND THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE COMMITTED TO 80 YEARS, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE DURING THAT SECOND 50 YEARS THAT THOSE STAY IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING? AS I UNDERSTAND IT AND THE ATTORNEYS CAN CLARIFY FOR ME BY STATUTE, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CAN ONLY IS LIMITED TO 30 YEARS. THE COVENANT CAN BE LONGER, WHICH IS 80 YEARS, AND THEN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CAN BE EXTENDED FOR ADDITIONAL TIME, AND I BELIEVE AND MS. RUIZ WILL POP IN AND CORRECT ME, BUT I BELIEVE THE COVENANT LISTS THE CITY AS A PARTY, CORRECT? CORRECT. THE CITY IS A THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY SO THAT IF THE PARTIES DECIDE AFTER THE 30 YEARS NOT TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE COVENANT WILL RUN WITH THE PROPERTY FOR THE ADDITIONAL TIME.

THE CITY IS A THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY AND HOPEFULLY IT WILL NEVER COME TO THIS BUT CAN GO TO COURT AND ENFORCE IT AS A THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY.

UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WE ARE LIMITED TO 30 YEARS, BUT THE STATUTE IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE PARTIES MAY MUTUALLY AGREE TO EXTEND IT UPON THAT 30 YEARS, AND THERE'S A THIRD LEVEL OF PROTECTION, WHICH IS THE ACTUAL COMP PLAN, LAND USE MAP CHANGE, WHICH HAS A PROVISION IN THAT ASTERISK.

SO BY COMP PLAN THEY'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO IT'S A THREE LEVEL PROTECTION.

MAYBE THAT'S THE WAY TO PHRASE IT, THE PRIVATE COVENANT THAT WE'RE A PARTY TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE LANGUAGE OF THE COLOR ON THE MAP, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE MAP, COLOR FOR THIS PROPERTY.

I WANT TO JUST THEN TAKE A MOMENT TO EXPLAIN WHY I SUPPORT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND REMIND PEOPLE THAT WE'VE SEEN A PROPOSAL TWICE BEFORE AND EACH TIME WE'VE ASKED FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THAT DEVELOPER HAS COME BACK WITH IT'S 10% OF THE TOTAL OF THE--APPROXIMATELY VERY, VERY CLOSE--OF THE TOTAL OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS IN THIS ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, NOT JUST THE TWO DIFFERENT PARTS OF IT, BUT FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S THE 50 UNITS.

I THINK THAT'S A PUBLIC BENEFIT GIVEN THE LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT WE HAVE.

IT DOESN'T GO ANYWHERE NEAR AS FAR AS WE NEED TO GO, BUT IT'S BETTER THAN NOTHING, AND SO I DO BELIEVE THAT IS A PUBLIC BENEFIT.

IT'S 10% OF THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT AND THAT'S NOT INSIGNIFICANT.

OKAY, THANK YOU. UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS, I'D LIKE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND RECEIVE PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE WE START FURTHER DISCUSSION, IF THAT'S OKAY . ONE MORE QUESTION FOR STAFF.

WILL YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS PROPOSAL AND THE LAST PROPOSAL WE HEARD? THE LAST PROPOSAL, I BELIEVE, IS THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT JUST 30 UNITS, AND SO THIS IS IF 50.

THANK YOU. VERY GOOD.

OKAY, MY FIRST SPEAKER IS MELINDA [INAUDIBLE].

MELINDA [INAUDIBLE] 86 MAGNOLIA AVENUE.

MY ONLY COMMENT IS I DO KNOW AT THE PREVIOUS READING COMMISSIONER HORVATH HAD RECOMMENDED 20%, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT LITTLE OVER 100, AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WAS NOT UNREASONABLE REQUEST, CONSIDERING THEY'RE STILL ADDING 180 TO THE WHOLE COMPLEX.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOU WANT TO STICK WITH THE 20% THAT WAS THE ASK IF I REMEMBER OR TO EVEN COMPROMISE AT 15%, BUT IT SEEMS THAT 10% IS STILL LOW FOR WHAT WE'RE GIVING IN RETURN, AND THERE WAS ALSO TALK AT THE PREVIOUS ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT TRAFFIC.

I THINK THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL 348 CARS THAT COME WITH THIS 180 UNITS AND I DON'T KNOW [INAUDIBLE] THAT WAS THE OTHER THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST.

[00:40:03]

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MY NEXT CARD IS MR. JIM SPRINGFIELD.

THANK YOU. JIM SPRINGFIELD 6 [INAUDIBLE] STREET.

I HAD TWO CONCERNS AND COMMISSIONER BLONDER BROUGHT BOTH OF THEM UP.

THE 38 UNIT WAS ONE, BUT SHE GOT AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND ONE WAS FOR THE ANNUAL REVIEW.

THERE'S NOT SPECIFIC DETAILS OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE REVIEWED, AND I THINK THAT MAKING SURE THAT THEY COMMIT TO THOSE 50 WITH SOME DETAIL OF WHO IS IN THERE, WHAT THE INCOME, HOW THEY CAME ABOUT, ADVERTISING FOR THOSE AND HOW THEY SELECT THOSE MIGHT BE REALLY IMPORTANT.

THANK YOU. VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AT THIS JUNCTURE, I DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE CARDS.

I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN ANY OTHER SPEAKERS THAT WISHES TO THAT WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THE FLAGLER CROSSING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

I HAVE NO FURTHER CARDS.

I DO NOT SEE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE, AND THEREFORE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION IS NOW CLOSED.

COMMISSIONERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN ON THIS.

WE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALLOWING ANOTHER 180 UNITS.

DOUBLING OUR UNIT COUNT FROM 8 TO 16 ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, AND THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GET WORSE. SO.

I REALLY THINK THAT 50 IS NOT ENOUGH.

I WOULD BE OKAY IF WE SAID HALF OF THEIR UNITS SAY 90 UNITS WOULD BE AFFORDABLE, 90 WOULD BE THEIR PROFIT.

THEY'RE STILL MAKING MONEY ON THE AFFORDABLE UNITS, I WOULD THINK, AND I WOULD MUCH PREFER HAVING THAT.

THERE'S ALSO WITH THAT, I THINK THE FACTOR IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING OFTEN HAS LESS CARS, SO THAT ALSO HELPS WITH OUR TRAFFIC IN THAT LOCATION.

SO I WOULD LIKE I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO MAKE A REQUEST FOR THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR.

LET ME CLARIFY SOMETHING.

THE DEVELOPER CAN ALREADY DEVELOP A CERTAIN THIS PROPERTY.

YES, AND HOW MANY UNITS ARE THEY ENTITLED TO NOW UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING CODE? THE EXISTING CODE IS EIGHT UNITS PER ACRE, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 336 UNITS.

WELL, LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT THIS THIS ADDITIONAL PIECE THAT'S UNDER CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THE PROJECT IS ALREADY APPROVED, AND COMING OUT OF THE GROUND, THE TOTAL ACRES INCLUDES THIS PIECE.

SO THE 42 POINT SO MANY ACRES INCLUDES ACTUALLY THIS PIECE.

THEY HAVE PERMITS FOR 11 BUILDINGS THAT ARE 330 UNITS.

SO THEORETICALLY, THEY'VE ALREADY GOT PERMITS FOR PRACTICALLY THE EIGHT UNITS PER ACRE.

SO THEY COULD BUILD 330 UNITS UNDER THEIR EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS.

YES, AND SO UNDER THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, WE GO TO 510.

YES. SO WHAT'S THAT? THAT EQUALS APPROXIMATELY 12 UNITS PER ACRE FOR THE ENTIRE 42 ACRES.

AND SO OVER 180 ADDITIONAL UNITS, 50 OF THOSE WILL BE DEVOTED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

YES. SO WHAT, A LITTLE BIT LESS THAN A THIRD? YES. IT'S 28%, I BELIEVE.

I'M SORRY, BUT WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE IS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, MS. SKINNER, THE WHOLE PROJECT GETS BUILT OUT TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE WITH THIS REQUEST.

WITH THIS REQUEST.

CURRENTLY, THEY HAVE EIGHT UNITS.

CORRECT, AND THEY'RE WILLING TO GIVE US 50 AFFORDABLE.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S ENOUGH.

I THINK 90 MAKES MORE SENSE.

I DON'T NEED TO SAY IT AGAIN. JUST ADD SOMETHING.

SO YOU JUST SAID EQUATES TO ABOUT A THIRD OF THE PROJECT, BUT ACTUALLY OF THE NEW UNIT, THE ADDITIONAL UNITS, BUT IT AVERAGES OUT TO BE ABOUT 10% OF THE WHOLE PROJECT.

RIGHT. RIGHT, BUT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BUILD THE WHOLE PROJECT AND THEY HAD NO OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE WHOLE PROJECT.

ABSOLUTELY, YES, BUT THEY WOULD ONLY HAVE 330 UNITS.

RIGHT, I UNDERSTAND.

IF I MAY. PLEASE.

THEY'RE ADDING A THIRD STORY ON ALL THESE BUILDINGS, CORRECT? I BELIEVE. YES, I BELIEVE SO, [INAUDIBLE] SAME FOUNDATIONS AND THE SAME ROOFS.

THEY'RE ADDING A LOT OF VERY INEXPENSIVE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THEY'LL SELL FOR THE SAME RATE AS YOU GOING TO SELL THE STUFF THAT'S ON THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR.

[00:45:06]

I LOVE ADDING MORE HEIGHT TO BUILDINGS BECAUSE MY COST DOESN'T GO UP EXPONENTIALLY, BUT MY RETURN GOES UP EXPONENTIALLY.

I AGREE WITH ROXANNE.

50 IS NOT ENOUGH HERE.

EVEN WITH THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASPECT OF IT, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO MAKE A PROFIT AT THAT AND A GOOD ONE.

NOW WE'RE GIVING AWAY 180 ADDITIONAL UNITS.

ALL THE TRAFFIC, ALL THE IMPACTS, I THINK IS WONDERFUL, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO GET MORE IN RETURN, AND I THINK ROXANNE IS SPOT ON.

COMMISSIONER HORVATH IS SPOT ON, WHICH HE SAYS 20% INSTEAD OF 10%.

SO I CAN'T SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE THE MATH DOESN'T WORK FOR ME FROM THE STANDPOINT OF DOING THIS AND KNOWING HOW IT WORKS.

SO THERE'S MORE TO BE HAD THERE.

I HAVE A QUESTION.

MS. SKINNER WE ARE AT 35 FEET, EVEN WITH THE ADDED STORY.

YES, CORRECT. CORRECT.

OKAY, SO I DETECT A SIGNIFICANT SENTIMENT TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL UNITS.

SO I GUESS IF WE GO TO 20 UNITS, I GUESS 20%.

WE'D BE ASKING FOR 100 UNITS.

IS THERE ANY RESPONSE FROM THE DEVELOPER OR DEVELOPER'S COUNCIL ON THIS QUESTION? I SEE ZEROES AGAIN.

AS WAS POINTED OUT, [INAUDIBLE] BEFORE THIS COMMISSION IS AN ADDITIONAL 180 UNITS.

THE 330 ARE BEING PERMITTED NOW.

THE ADDITIONAL DENSITY IS FOR THE ADDITIONAL 180, AND THE PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS FOR 50 UNITS, WHICH IS 28% OF THOSE ADDITIONAL 180. THE AMOUNT AND HOW THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS CALCULATED IS A BETTER MIX OF USES BECAUSE IT'S AT 85% AND NOT YOUR TYPICAL 120 TO 90%.

WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING BELOW WHAT WAS TYPICAL AND USING AN 85%.

SO WE'RE PICKING UP MORE PEOPLE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY LIVE HERE.

THE 20% IS JUST NOT DOABLE FOR MY CLIENT.

I WILL POINT OUT I DO A LOT OF DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT OR DID BACK IN THE DAY AND THE THUMB OF OR THE POLICY BECAUSE THERE IS NO LAW AS TO HOW MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS QUOTE UNQUOTE, REQUIRED, JUST LIKE HERE IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, BUT FROM THE REGULATORY AGENCIES BACK IN THE DAY, IT WAS 10% OF THE TOTAL UNITS IN A DRY.

SO THE 10% WASN'T JUST LIKE RANDOMLY PICKED.

IT WAS A STANDARD THAT WE'VE USED THROUGHOUT ON THESE BIGGER PROJECTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS EITHER WORKFORCE HOUSING OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND THAT RULE OF THUMB CAME FROM THE REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL AND WHEN THEY REVIEWED THE DRIS, YOU HAD TO PRODUCE AT LEAST 10% OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MEET THE RULES.

SO THAT'S WHERE THAT'S COMING FROM.

WELL, THAT WAS BEFORE MY DAY ON THE REGIONAL COUNCIL.

I'VE ONLY BEEN WITH THEM FOR TEN YEARS, BUT IT DIDN'T WORK OUT TOO WELL BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY SHORT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO MAYBE THE 10% WASN'T ENOUGH AT THAT TIME.

WELL, UNFORTUNATELY, IN ORDER TO REGULATE ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT FROM DEVELOPERS, IT NEEDS TO BECOME LAW, AND SO RIGHT NOW, WHAT I'M RECOMMENDING TO MY CLIENT, JUST FROM A FINANCIAL STANDPOINT, IS WE CAN DO THE 10% NOT UNDERSTANDING WHEN WE CAME IN FOR THE APPLICATION THAT THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT, AND WE'RE BASING IT ON THE ADDITIONAL 180 UNITS , BUT IT'S 10% OF THE OVERALL 510 UNITS.

IT'S NOT ACTUALLY 10%, SLIGHTLY LESS, BUT IF IT WERE 90 INSTEAD OF 100 UNITS, IT WOULDN'T BE 20%. IT WOULD BE 18% OR SOMETHING TO THAT POINT.

I THINK I STILL FEEL 90 UNITS SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE 180 UNITS.

THAT WOULD MAKE A BIG HELP TO OUR COMMUNITY AND SO THAT WAS MY POSITION.

PLEASE. GOOD EVENING, BILLY [INAUDIBLE].

502 [INAUDIBLE] AVENUE, SOUTH DAVIS SHORES.

THANK YOU FOR THE HURRICANE BRIEFING, AND I'M ALSO HERE REPRESENTING CORNER LOT DEVELOPMENT GROUP.

I DO WANT TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD--IF YOU CAN PULL THAT MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOU SO WE CAN HEAR YOU A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

THANK YOU. SO I DO WANT TO SHARE WITH THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU WAS BORN OUT OF EVERYTHING WE HEARD FROM STAFF AND FROM OUR PREVIOUS HEARINGS. I DID WANT TOUCH ON THE RENT BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE IF YOU HAD REVIEWED THOSE WHERE WE STARTED.

[00:50:07]

WE STARTED WITH HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND WE ASKED WHAT PERCENTAGE WAS GOING TO BE AN APPROPRIATE PERCENTAGE, AND THEY FELT LIKE 120% OF THE AREA AMI WOULD BE A BIG WIN BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE GAP IN THE MARKET IS.

WE DIDN'T FEEL LIKE THAT WAS IMPACTFUL ENOUGH WHEN WE CAME TO THIS BOARD THE FIRST TIME, WE BROUGHT 100 TO 110%.

THE FEEDBACK THAT WE GOT WAS THAT PROBABLY WASN'T GOING TO BE AFFORDABLE ENOUGH BECAUSE WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE A REALLY HIGH AMI IN ST JOHN'S COUNTY.

THAT DOESN'T HELP OUR CASE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WE DID MOVE IT STRATEGICALLY TO 85%, AND THE REASON THAT WE MOVED IT TO 85% IS BECAUSE WE REVIEWED THE SALARIES OF TEACHERS, ENTRY LEVEL LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND THEY WILL FIT UNDERNEATH THAT ONE PERSON PROFILE OF WHAT THE REQUIRED SALARY IS TO BENEFIT FROM THIS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO I DO WANT TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD THE RENT.

SO THE MARKET RENT RIGHT NOW FOR A ONE BEDROOM IN ST AUGUSTINE AND ST JOHN'S COUNTY IS 1850 PER UNIT, WHICH IS SHOCKING. THE RENT THAT WE'RE OFFERING IS $1333 OR $517 DISCOUNT.

FOR TWO BEDROOMS IT'S 2400 IS THE MARKET RENT AND THE RENT THAT WE'RE OFFERING IS $1600 AND THAT IS $800 DISCOUNT OFF OF WHAT THE MARKET RENT IS, AND THE THREE BEDROOM IS 2750, AND OUR RENT WILL BE 1847, WHICH WOULD BE $903 OFF OF THE MARKET RATE.

SO WE DID ALL OF THIS STRATEGICALLY.

WE MOVED FROM 30 TO 36 TO 50, AND WE LOWERED THE RENTS, ALL WITH THE INTENT OF PROVIDING AN IMMEDIATE IMPACT TO THE INSATIABLE APPETITE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE.

THE TIMING OF THIS IS CRITICAL BECAUSE.

AS AMY NOTED, WE DO HAVE 11 BUILDING PERMITS, WE HOPE THROUGH THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND PROPOSAL TO BE ABLE TO OBTAIN SIX MORE, WHICH WOULD ALL BE THREE STOREY BUILDINGS, JUST LIKE THE 11 BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE AND WE'RE BUILDING TODAY.

SO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE IMMEDIATE RELIEF HERE IN THE NEXT 18 TO 36 MONTHS OF BRINGING THESE AFFORDABLE UNITS TO THE MARKET, AND THIS RENT WILL BE FIXED THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT, WHICH I'D LIKE TO REALLY THANK THE STAFF FOR WORKING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH US, BECAUSE IT WAS NOT IT WAS NOT A SMALL TASK. SO I DID WANT TO OFFER THAT, AND TO THE MAYOR AND TO THE COMMISSION.

IF THERE'S OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE THEM.

COMMISSIONERS, WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU IS THIS.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF COMMISSIONER HORVATH, COMMISSIONER VALDEZ, ARE SET IN THEIR POSITION, NOT SET, BUT THE POSITION THEY WANT TO PURSUE, THEN PERHAPS THE APPROPRIATE MOTION WOULD BE TO TABLE THIS MATTER.

IF THAT IS SUCCESSFUL, THEN WE TABLE IT AND WOULD ASK STAFF TO CONTINUE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER.

IF IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS GOOD AS PRESENTED TODAY, THEN YOU WOULD VOTE AGAINST THAT MOTION.

IF YOU WANT ADDITIONAL UNITS, YOU WOULD VOTE FOR THAT MOTION TO TABLE.

IF THAT FAILS, THEN A MOTION TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE MOTION.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? ALL RIGHT, IS THERE A MOTION? I MAKE THE MOTION TO TABLE THIS SO STAFF CAN WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER.

THANK YOU. SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION. I HAVE A SECOND.

EXCUSE ME. I APOLOGIZE.

I'M SORRY. WE DO WANT THIS TO BE THE FIRST READING OF THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

SO WHEN YOU'RE SAYING TO TABLE IT, YOU'RE SIMPLY WANTING A DELAY TO THE SECOND READING TO SEE IF WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT.

JUST SO I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR DIRECTION TO US.

THAT COULD WORK. YES.

SO WE DON'T LOSE TIME, RIGHT? BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE WOULD HAVE TO DO ANOTHER FIRST READING OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

SO IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU YOU WANT THIS TO COUNT AS THE FIRST READING OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? AND BETWEEN NOW AND THE TIME WE SCHEDULE THE SECOND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HEARING, SEE IF WE CAN WORK OUT A GREATER NUMBER.

IS THAT MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR DIRECTION? I MIGHT JUMP IN HERE FIRST READING.

I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BUILDING.

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.

THIS IS GOING TO COME BACK TO US AGAIN.

WE CAN TABLE THEN AS MANY TIMES AS WE LIKE.

I WANT THE POT SWEETENED, BUT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PASS IT ON SECOND READING, KNOWING THAT WHEN THEY COME BACK IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE SWEET OR ELSE IT'S GOING TO BE TABLE.

THEN WE'LL DISCUSSING IT FURTHER JUST TO MOVE THE PROCESS ALONG.

OKAY, SO YOU'RE CORRECT ON THAT.

THANK YOU. SO THEN THE APPROPRIATE MOTION, THEN, WITH THE PERMISSION OF BOTH COMMISSIONER HORVATH AND THE VICE MAYOR, WILL WITHDRAW THAT MOTION AND

[00:55:08]

I DON'T THINK TO ACTUALLY READ IT, BUT JUST SO THAT THE MOTION SHOWS THAT THIS WAS A FIRST READING AND THAT YOU'RE DIRECTING US TO SCHEDULE A SECOND READING, A PENDING DISCUSSION WITH THE DEVELOPER, IS THAT FAIR? SO THEN THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ON FIRST READING WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF STAFF TO CONTINUE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE DEVELOPER TO RAISE THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS.

YES. SO THAT'S THE MOTION.

I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND.

DISCUSSION. I'M JUST GOING TO COME CLEAN HERE AND SAY THAT I'M REALLY TORN ON THIS ONE.

ON THE ONE HAND, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER HORVATH AND COMMISSIONER VALDES THAT WE SHOULD GO FOR AS MANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS AS WE CAN GET.

THERE'S NO QUESTION.

ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED AT 85% OF AMI, IF THEY HAVE TO GO TO MORE UNITS, THEY'RE GOING TO RAISE THAT MINIMUM TO 120, AND SO THAT WOULD EXCLUDE THE TEACHERS AND THE EMERGENCY SERVICES AND SOME OTHERS THAT MIGHT QUALIFY FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND SO I'M REALLY ON THE FENCE ABOUT THIS AS WE GO INTO THE SECOND READING.

IF WE APPROVE THE FIRST READING.

I'M SORRY, I THINK YOU MIGHT BE ASSUMING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY CANNOT STILL HOLD THE 85%.

OKAY, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS, AND TO STATE MY POSITION, I THINK THIS IS A GOOD AGREEMENT.

I'M UNAWARE THAT WE HAVE HAD A PREVIOUS I CERTAINLY DON'T RECALL IN MY TIME.

I COULD OBVIOUSLY BE MISREMEMBERING A SIMILAR TYPE OF AGREEMENT.

I THINK WE HAVE A QUALITY DEVELOPER.

I THINK THEY'VE COME WITH A VERY SOLID PROPOSAL AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A GOOD AGREEMENT AND I SUPPORT IT.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE ONE REQUEST.

STAFF MENTIONED A STUDY BY THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA NEEDING 3400 UNITS BY 2040.

I'D LIKE TO SEE A COPY OF THAT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S RELEVANT.

IT'S SAYING THAT WE NEED 577 UNITS BY 2040 AFFORDABLE, AND THAT'S QUITE DAUNTING.

SO IT GIVES ME A SENSE OF URGENCY ON THIS MATTER, AND IN ADDITION, AS I SAID AT THE LAST HEARING ON THIS, I FEEL STRONGLY THAT I'M LISTENING.

I'M HOPING THAT WE CAN WORK THROUGH TO GET MORE UNITS.

MYSELF AND I ADMIRE YOU FOR STICKING TO YOUR GUNS ON THAT, BUT WE DO WE ALSO NEED MULTIFAMILY UNITS.

WE NEED MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN THE CITY.

NOT THAT THEY'RE AFFORDABLE, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE.

I'M TALKING ABOUT MULTIFAMILY UNITS IN GENERAL.

WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A BIG DISCUSSION ABOUT DENSITY HERE IN JUST A SHORT, SHORT TIME, AND I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE WEIGH THESE IN BALANCE AND HOW WE TREAT EVERYONE FAIRLY TO GET WHERE WE WANT TO GET.

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT DENSITY.

LET'S BE FAIR ACROSS THE BOARD AND HOW WE HANDLE THIS WITH OUR APPLICANT.

ENOUGH SAID. IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO INDULGE ME, I DO HAVE SOME INFORMATION THAT I CAN SHOW IF [INAUDIBLE] WANTS TO BRING IT UP.

THE REFERENCES THAT I MADE ARE FROM THE DATA AND ANALYSIS THAT WAS DONE FOR THE HOUSING ELEMENT FOR THE UPDATE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE'VE SPOKEN OUR PIECE.

IS THERE FURTHER CONVERSATION OR DEBATE? IT'S GOING TO COME BACK TO US.

JUST A QUICK POINT.

THE VICE MAYOR IS CORRECT.

WE DON'T HAVE MUCH MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AT ALL, AND TO THAT POINT, I RECENTLY READ AN ARTICLE THIS WEEK THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS, COMMISSIONER VALDES.

ARE STARTER HOMES BEING BUILT ANYMORE, ARE 4500 SQUARE FOOT HOMES THAT ARE 200,000 SELLING PRICE BEING BUILT ANYMORE? NOT REALLY. [INAUDIBLE] I'M SORRY? AS THE INTEREST RATES CONTINUE TO CLIMB, YOU'LL SEE LESS AND LESS.

YEAH, AND SO THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING AND RENTAL APARTMENTS AND OTHERWISE MIGHT IS PROBABLY TAKING OVER, TAKING OVER FOR THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT WE USED TO BE ABLE TO DO.

OKAY.

MR. [INAUDIBLE]? YEAH.

AT THE PLEASURE OF THE MAYOR, IF I CAN OFFER SOMETHING.

I MUST HAVE GOTTEN TALLER SINCE THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE.

[01:00:02]

WE WOULDN'T EVEN STILL BE HERE IF YOU GUYS DIDN'T TAKE THE TIME TO SHARE WITH US HOW YOU FEEL AND HOW WE CAN PUT TOGETHER AN AGREEMENT THAT BENEFITS THE CITY THAT I LIVE IN, BUT ALSO KIND OF THE LONG TERM NEEDS FOR HOUSING, AND I'D BE REMISS, I THANK, YOU KNOW, ISABEL AND HER TEAM AND AMY AND DAVID SEVERAL TIMES, BUT ESPECIALLY BEING A RESIDENT, DAVIS SHORES TO HAVE A PROACTIVE CITY FROM FLOOD VENTS TO HOUSE LIFTING TO GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT.

I GOT TO NOTICES IN THE MAIL THIS WEEK REMINDING ME OF FLOODING AND THINGS I CAN DO.

I WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO THANK JOHN AND HIS LEADERSHIP BECAUSE IT'S COME A LONG WAY.

I HAD WORKED IN THE EOC DURING A NUMBER OF STORMS, SO IT'S NICE TO SEE THE EVOLUTION OF THE COMMUNICATION AND HOPEFULLY IT ALL SWINGS IN OUR FAVOR AND I MEAN THE TRACK OF THE STORM. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THERE BEING NO FURTHER DEBATE.

WOULD THE CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? THANK YOU, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PASSES ON FIRST READING AND THE SECOND HEARING WILL BE OCTOBER 10TH AS WAS ANNOUNCED.

SO HOPEFULLY BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, WE CAN WORK SOMETHING OUT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MS. LOPEZ.

WE ARE NOW ON ITEM 8(A)(1) ORDINANCE 2022-14, WHICH CREATES A MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT MODE, FUTURE

[8.A.1. Ordinance 2022-14: Creates a Mobility Oriented Development (MOD) Future Land Use Category to be inserted into the Comprehensive Plan. (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

MS. SKINNER. YES, GOOD EVENING AGAIN.

THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE 22-14 AND ACTUALLY A SECOND ORDINANCE 22-15 CREATE A NEW LAND USE CATEGORY TO BE INSERTED INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND A NEW COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT TO BE INSERTED INTO THE ZONING CODE AS A NEW COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

THE ORDINANCES WOULD CREATE CATEGORIES RELATED TO MOBILITY ORIENTED ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT OR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, AS IS MORE COMMONLY KNOWN.

THESE CATEGORIES ARE INTENDED TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS BY CONNECTIONS AND BIKE PARKING.

PARKING DESIGNS THAT INCLUDE PARKING GARAGES, ELIMINATE EXCESS PAVEMENT, AND CREATE AN ATTRACTIVE AND SAFE MULTIMODAL TRANSIT STATION.

THE PRINCIPLES OF MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE WALKABLE INCLUDE BUILDINGS ON THE STREET, COMPACT DEVELOPMENT AND MIXED USE AND ACTIVE STREETS.

THESE ARE ALL PRINCIPLES THAT ARE EXIST IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND HAVE BEEN PROMOTED BY THE CITY FOR MANY YEARS.

AS I SAID, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WAS RECENTLY UPDATED.

IT INCLUDES A BALANCE OF LIVABILITY, MOBILITY AND ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION THAT HELP WITH SUSTAINABILITY AND THE NEED FOR HOUSING OPTIONS. AS WELL AS INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT.

THE MOBILITY PLAN HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AND ENACTED IN THE CITY, CONTINUES TO PRIORITIZE A MIX OF USES.

THE CITY RECOGNIZES THAT IT HAS EVOLVED OVER TIME AND WILL CONTINUE TO EVOLVE.

THIS LAND USE ORDINANCE CREATING THE MOD INTENDS TO ENCOURAGE THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS.

THE MOBILITY STATION CAN INCLUDE A PUBLIC TRANSIT STATION, A COMMUTER RAIL STATION, OR A PUBLICLY UTILIZED PARKING GARAGE.

THIS IS WHERE I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY SOMETHING SINCE THE JULY 11TH MEETING THAT WE HAD.

IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT TO ME THAT BY DEFINITION, A MOBILITY STATION CAN BE ANY ONE OF THESE ITEMS, BUT NONE ARE YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE ONE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER WHETHER YOU WANT TO REQUIRE A SPECIFIC ITEM OF THESE THREE.

FOR EXAMPLE, A PARKING GARAGE IS NOT TECHNICALLY REQUIRED RIGHT NOW.

IT'S ONE OF THE THREE OPTIONS THAT WOULD MAKE SOMETHING AS A MOBILITY STATION, BUT IF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT REQUIRED, WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE.

A MOBILITY STATION MUST BE LOCATED AT ONE OF THE TWO AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED.

ONE AREA IS THE AREA NEAR THE KING STREET AND US ONE INTERSECTION AS WELL AS THE AREA NORTH OF TOWN WHERE THE FEC RAIL YARD IS, SOUTH OF THE WINN-DIXIE. THE MOD LAND USE PROMOTES A MIX OF USES, ALLOWS 50 UNITS PER ACRE AND 60 FEET OF HEIGHT 75 FEET IF IT'S ZONED MOD AND IN AN ENTRY CORRIDOR AND MEETS THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THAT ENTRY CORRIDOR.

A PROJECT MUST INCLUDE A MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT AND AT LEAST ONE OTHER USE AND A MOBILITY STATION.

IF THE LOCATION IS NOT IN AN ENTRY CORRIDOR WITH DESIGN STANDARDS, THE HEIGHT IS LIMITED TO 60 FEET UNLESS IT IS REZONE TO A PUD.

SO THAT WOULD APPLY TO THE NORTHERN LOCATION BY THE WINN-DIXIE OFF OF US ONE AND MOD PUD MUST INCLUDE MOBILITY PIECES AS WELL AS

[01:05:10]

THE PZB RECOMMENDED THE CREATION OF THIS LAND USE CATEGORY.

AT THEIR JUNE MEETING, THE CITY COMMISSION INTRODUCED THE ORDINANCE AND HELD A TRANSMITTAL PUBLIC HEARING JULY 11.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WAS TRANSMITTED TO THE STATE REVIEWING AGENCIES.

THE FDOT WAS THE ONLY AGENCY THAT HAD A COMMENT WHICH NOTED THAT IF THIS LAND USE CATEGORY IS APPLIED TO A SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY, THEN A TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS SHOULD BE REQUIRED.

THIS IS A SECOND READING IN A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ORDINANCE 2022-14.

IF THE CITY COMMISSION CHOOSES TO MOVE FORWARD, THE ADOPTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT WILL BE TRANSMITTED BACK TO THE STATE IN ORDER TO BECOME EFFECTIVE.

I DO HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO DENSITY AND HEIGHT.

IF THE COMMISSION HAS ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION.

OKAY, LET ME START WITH AN EASY QUESTION.

ON THE FDOT LETTER OF AUGUST 9, 2020, THIRD FULL PARAGRAPH FDOT RECOMMENDS YES, THAT MEANS DO IT.

IN OUR OPINION, IT MEANS DO IT.

I THINK YES.

OKAY, WE DO NEED TO DO A PUBLIC HEARING.

I HAVE ONE CARD AT THE CURRENT TIME.

I'M SURE I'LL RECEIVE OTHERS.

ARE THERE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO IMMEDIATELY TO PUBLIC HEARING? I THINK PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE A GREAT IDEA.

SO AT THIS JUNCTURE, COME FORTH. THANK YOU, SIR.

MY FIRST SPEAKER IS MELINDA [INAUDIBLE].

MELINDA [INAUDIBLE], 86 MAGNOLIA AVENUE.

WELL, I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THE ORDINANCE HAS FINALLY BEEN SEPARATED FROM THE PROJECT, AND WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE ORDINANCE TONIGHT.

THIS IS A GREAT CONCERN TO ME.

I SENT QUESTIONS TO EVERYBODY SO I WON'T GO OVER THEM BECAUSE ALL FIVE COMMISSIONERS HAVE THEM TO CONSIDER.

I'M ALSO GLAD TO SEE IT'S FINALLY BEEN CLARIFIED THAT WORD OR OF THE THREE AND THAT WE COULD HAVE MISSED THE GARAGE IF THIS ISN'T FIXED, BUT MOSTLY I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY FOCUS ON THIS AS A NEW ORDINANCE AND HOW THIS IS GOING TO AFFECT FUTURE ORDINANCES AND FUTURE PUDS AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

I'VE BEEN IN ZONING FOR 42 YEARS.

I HAVE SEEN PLANNING AND ZONING BOARDS COME AND GO, CITY COMMISSIONS COME AND GO, BUT DEVELOPERS ARE ALL THE SAME, AND THAT IS THEY ARE ALWAYS PUSHING THE CODE TO THE LIMIT THAT THEY CAN AND ALWAYS ASKING FOR AS MUCH AS THE OTHER GUY HAD--IT'S JUST WHAT'S BEEN GOING ON. SO THE 75 FEET IS WAY OUT OF SCALE OF EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S IN ST AUGUSTINE.

I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER SIKES-KLINE TALKED ABOUT THAT IN THE COUNTY IT'S ONLY 45 FEET.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT GOING OVER 35 FEET SINCE WE'RE CROSSING US ONE.

IT JUST SHOULDN'T GO ANYWHERE NEAR 75, AND I'VE BEEN HEARING THIS WHEN I GO DOOR TO DOOR TALKING TO PEOPLE OR THEY'RE LIKE, OH, MY GOD, WHAT'S GOING ON? THE 75 FEET, YOU ADD THE TEN FOOT FLOOD PLAIN AND THEN YOU ADD THE ELEVATOR SHAFTS AND THE EQUIPMENT.

YOU'RE UP TO 95 FEET, TOTALLY OUT OF SCALE FOR A SPANISH COLONIAL AND VICTORIAN HISTORIC TOWN AND ALSO SMALL TOWN.

THE OTHER IS THE DENSITY INCREASING FROM EIGHT AND 16 UNITS, WHICH IS OUR TYPICAL ALL THE WAY UP TO 50.

WE JUST FINISHED HEARING FLAGLER CROSSING AND LOOK AT THE GIVE.

THEY HAD TO GO JUST TO GO FROM 8 TO 16 AND THAT'S GOING TO BE ONE OF OUR BIG PROJECTS.

I CAN'T IMAGINE GOING FROM 16 TO 50, IT'S THREE TIMES, SO THAT NEEDS TO REALLY BE BROUGHT DOWN.

MAYBE CONSIDER 24 UNITS AN ACRE.

THAT IS THE HIGHEST WE HAVE IN THE CITY ALREADY IN THE COLONIAL CORPS, WHICH IS QUOTE, OUR URBAN DISTRICT, BUT A LOT OF THESE SIZES, 50 UNITS AN ACRE, THOSE ARE COMING FROM TODS AND BIG URBAN AREAS THAT ALREADY HAVE METROS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, 80% LOT COVERAGE.

AGAIN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE DENSITY AND HEIGHT, WHICH I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH, JUST NOT TO THE EXTENT YOU NEED TO HAVE MORE GREEN SPACE, YOU JUST YOU CAN'T GO

[01:10:02]

AT 80% LOT COVERAGE WITH THIS KIND OF HEIGHT AND THIS KIND OF DENSITY, IT'LL BE A CONCRETE JUNGLE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MR. JIM SPRINGFIELD.

JIM SPRINGFIELD 6 [INAUDIBLE] STREET.

ALTHOUGH THIS IS FOR THE MOD, I DO WANT TO TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE ONE THAT WILL HAPPEN PROPOSED AT KING STREET, BECAUSE THE DETAILS OF THIS ONE ARE WRITTEN FOR THAT PARTICULAR SITE BECAUSE THE TWO SITES IN QUESTION THAT KING STREET AND UP BY WINN-DIXIE ARE TWO SEPARATE POSSIBLE ISSUES.

YOU COULD HAVE MORE GREEN SPACE THAT WINN-DIXIE BECAUSE THERE'S MORE ACREAGE BUT THERE IS NOT THAT ACREAGE AT THE KING STREET US ONE.

SO OBVIOUSLY THIS MOD IS WRITTEN SPECIFICALLY TO FIT INTO THAT FIVE ACRE PARCEL.

I AM AN OPTIMISTIC PERSON AND I DO KIND OF LIKE THIS CONCEPT.

I HAVE READ THE LATEST REVISION OF SUBURBAN NATION AND I HAVE READ THIS MOD AND I UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE IN THIS FIX, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT AN URBAN NECESSARILY TOWN.

WE'RE IN THIS FIX BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE FIFTIES AND SIXTIES.

I DID WALK DOOR TO DOOR TODAY TO THE BUSINESSES AND ASK THEM THEIR OPINIONS, AND WE HAD TWO OPPOSED AND FIVE FOUR OF THE ONES THAT I VISITED, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THEM DID NOT KNOW MUCH OF THE DETAILS.

ALL THEY KNEW WAS IT WAS GOING TO BE A GARAGE.

THEY WERE EXCITED TO HEAR THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WHICH I SAID, WELL, THAT'S NOT WRITTEN IN THE PLAN.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY.

I MENTIONED THAT 75 FEET IS TOO HIGH, AND MOST PEOPLE I SPEAK TO AGREE THAT 75 FEET IS HIGH, AND THE ONLY WAY I THINK THE PEOPLE THAT I SPEAK TO AND ACTUALLY GET INTO DETAILS WITH IT AND EXPLAIN IT IS THAT IF WE COULD DO 75 FEET BUT HAVE A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING SO THAT INSTEAD OF THE 10% LIKE IN THE NORTH PART OF TOWN, THAT WE WOULD HAVE A 20% AFFORDABLE HOUSING WITH THIS PROJECT AND IT STILL FEASIBLE.

WE ALSO HAVE NOT SEEN THE DETAILS ON WHY THEY NEED TO GO TO 75 FEET.

THERE'S NOT BEEN AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OR ANY KIND OF DETAILS AND ALSO THE TRAFFIC WILL DEFINITELY BE A PROBLEM, AND I THINK THE PARAGRAPH ABOUT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT IF THE PROPERTY IS NO LONGER USED WHEN MOD, THAT LANGUAGE NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHENED SO THAT WE CAN GET OUT OF THAT AND TAKE THE LAND.

I ALSO DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD LEASE THE LAND FOR THE GARAGE.

I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE A PURCHASE, OUGHT TO BE SOME AGREEMENT OVER TIME THAT THE LAND WILL REVERT.

MR. [INAUDIBLE] HAS AN INTEREST IN HIS FAMILY OWNING THAT LAND FOREVER AND EVER AND I THINK THE CITY OUGHT TO BE A LITTLE MORE AGGRESSIVE IN TRYING TO OWN THE LAND WHERE THE PARKING GARAGE IS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MY NEXT SPEAKER IS BILLY [INAUDIBLE].

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, THE BOARD.

AT CORNER LOT DEVELOPMENT GROUP, WE'RE ENGAGED WITH THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE AND ST JOHN'S COUNTY, AND OF COURSE, YOU ALL WITH TRYING TO FIND SOLUTIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AS A RESIDENT, IT'S NICE TO SEE UPDATES TO THE PLAN THAT CAN HELP PROVIDE VERTICAL COMPACT DEVELOPMENT IN TERMS OF MULTIFAMILY OR MULTI STOREY DEVELOPMENT CONNECTED TO TRANSPORTATION. WE'VE DONE THREE PROJECTS IN THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE THAT ARE ALL TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS.

IT'S FANTASTIC THAT WE'RE HAVING THE CONVERSATION IN OUR CITY AND EVERY BOARD THAT WE ENGAGE WITH IN TERMS OF FINDING SOLUTIONS FOR HOUSING.

THE CONVERSATION IS ABOUT DENSITY BECAUSE WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF LAND IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA AND NOT ONLY ARE WE RUNNING OUT OF LAND, BUT WITH THE MEASURES THAT EVERYONE'S TAKING FOR RESILIENCY AND PROTECTING THEIR COASTLINES AND PROTECTING THE MARSHLANDS, THE OPEN SPACE THAT WE HAVE IS INCREDIBLY AFFORDABLE.

SO THANK YOU AS A RESIDENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS MISS CYNTHIA [INAUDIBLE].

GOOD EVENING. I JUST HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE [INAUDIBLE] PROJECT I HAVE WENT TO THE REVEAL OF IT YOU KNOW, THAT THEY HAD DOWN THERE ON THE LOT AND LIVING OVER IN WEST ST AUGUSTINE.

SO BEING PART OF THE CITY, THERE IS NOTHING EXCITING OVER THERE.

NOTHING, AND I THINK THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE CAN CHANGE THAT NOT ONLY CAN WE PROVIDE HOUSING, BUT WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO REVIVE THAT AREA.

THAT AREA HAS BEEN JUST THERE EVER SINCE FOOD WAY WENT AWAY, AND I TALKED TO MR. [INAUDIBLE]'S INTENT ABOUT HIS VISION, AND I SAW THE SCALES AND THE MAPS AND THINGS ABOUT THAT, AND I ALSO KNOW THAT THE TRIP IS 60 FEET.

[01:15:03]

HE'S TOLD ME THAT HE WAS PLANNING ON GIVING THE CORRIDOR TO THE CITY BY PURCHASING THAT LITTLE AUTO PLACE AND GIVING THAT TO THE CITY, AND ABOUT THE PARKING.

SO MANY RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PARKING AND, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, WE NEED PARKING.

IT'S I MEAN, CARS ARE GOING TO KEEP COMING EVERY TIME A TOURIST COMES HERE AND ENJOYS IT.

GUESS WHAT? THEY'RE MOVING HERE.

SO WE NEED PARKING, WE NEED HOUSING, AND IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP SOME GREEN SPACE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO UP, BECAUSE IF WE GO ACROSS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO KILL GREEN SPACE.

SO I JUST WANT YOU TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND BECAUSE THEY HAVE OWNED THAT PROPERTY SINCE WORLD WAR TWO.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO JUST TURN THAT PROPERTY OVER TO THE CITY, AND WE WOULD BE FOOLISH TO THINK THAT THEY WOULD.

HOWEVER, I THINK THAT WE ARE AT A TIME THAT IF A DEVELOPER CAME HERE FROM JACKSONVILLE, MAYBE ORLANDO, AND HAD THE SAME VISION.

I THINK YOU GUYS PROBABLY BE MORE OPEN TO IT, BUT THIS IS A LOCAL PERSON THAT HAS PUT ROOTS AND BLOOD AND SWEAT AND TEARS IN THIS COMMUNITY, HIM AND HIS FAMILY, OVER THE YEARS, AND I THINK IF HE HAS THE VISION AND THE INCOME TO MAKE OUR CITY STRONGER AND PROVIDE A REVIVE IN A PARTICULAR AREA, THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER IT WITH OPEN MINDS.

SO I'M JUST ASKING YOU TO JUST THINK ABOUT IT, AND I KNOW YOU GUYS CAN'T TALK AMONG EACH OTHER, BUT WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THESE PLANS AND THINGS, ASK YOURSELF, REALLY, IS THAT REALLY GOING TO HURT THE CITY TO SEE THAT AREA REVIVED OVER THERE? IS IT REALLY GOING TO BE THAT HORRIBLE? OR IS IT GOING TO BE NICE TO SEE THAT SIDE COME TO LIFE AGAIN? THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I DO NOT HAVE ANY MORE CARDS.

I'VE GOT ONE SPEAKER COMING FORWARD.

IF ANYBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE A CARD AND GIVE IT TO CITY STAFF.

WELCOME, MS. KALAIDI.

BJ KALAIDI, WEST CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE 8 NEWCOMB ST.

WRITING AN ORDINANCE FOR A DEVELOPER TO ALLEGEDLY ADDRESS THE MOBILITY PROBLEM IN THE CITY LIMITS WHILE PERMITTING SCOOTERS, GOLF CARTS, MOTORCYCLES, ETC.

TO CLUTTER THE STREETS IS, IN MY OPINION, RIDICULOUS.

YOU NEED TO VOTE NO ON THIS ORDINANCE 2022-14, AND I LIVE IN THAT AREA.

IT'S WEST CITY, NOT WEST AUGUSTINE.

IT'S WEST CITY.

FROM US, ONE TO MASTER'S DRIVE, AND THOSE BUSINESSES THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT CONTINUE TO VIOLATE OUR CODES SO THEY DON'T HAVE CONSIDERATION FOR AND RESPECT FOR THIS CITY, AND I CONTINUE TO TRY AND GET THAT TAKEN CARE OF.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE HAVING THAT INTERSECTION.

WITH A HOTEL AND A GARAGE IS REALLY GOING WITH THE CHARACTER OF WHAT THE CITY IS ABOUT.

I KNOW EVERYBODY WANTS TO COME HERE.

NOBODY REALLY UNDERSTANDS WHAT'S HERE.

YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT, AND WE KEEP SAYING THAT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

WE DON'T HAVE THE SPACE FOR THEM.

WE ARE A £5 BAG OF POTATOES.

WE'RE TRYING TO PUT IN 100 BAG OF POTATOES IN THIS CITY AND BUILDING THESE THINGS IN THE WEST AREA OF ST AUGUSTINE IS NOT GOING TO HELP US, AND THE BUILDINGS UP AND DOWN US ONE NOW, THE COLLEGE IS BUYING THE AS I REFER TO IT, THE CRAYOLA HOTEL, BECAUSE THEY NEED SPACE FOR THEIR 2500 PEOPLE.

SO US ONE IS TURNING INTO JACKSONVILLE AND I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO BE LOOKING LIKE JACKSONVILLE.

SO I'M TOTALLY AGAINST WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, AND IT'S NOT MR. [INAUDIBLE]'S LEGACY THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT.

I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN THIS CITY FOR EVERYONE, NO MATTER WHICH SIDE OF THE STREET OF US ONE THAT YOU LIVE AND WORK ON.

THANKS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I HAVE ONE MORE CARD.

THANK YOU. MISS NANCY [INAUDIBLE].

GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS NANCY [INAUDIBLE], 31 SPANISH, AND I JUST WANT TO SAY, I WENT TO THAT SAME MEETING AT MR. [INAUDIBLE], AND I REALIZED THAT THEY'VE LIVED HERE FOREVER.

[01:20:02]

THERE'LL BE TWO PARKING GARAGES, NO HOTEL.

THOSE ARE APARTMENTS AND CONDOS AND RESTAURANTS AND THEN BUSINESSES BELOW, AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE THINKS THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

IT'S GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND IT'LL BE A WONDERFUL THING.

WHAT PEOPLE WHO'VE LIVED HERE A LONG TIME ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IS THE DENSITY AND THE FACT THAT WE ARE BECOMING BIG HOTELS AND THAT THIS WILL BE ANOTHER PROJECTION OF THAT, AND I JUST WANTED TO ASK HOW 60 AND 75 FEET WERE, HOW THEY CAME UP WITH THAT NUMBER.

AS TO BEING THE HEIGHT OF THE CONDOS AND THE APARTMENTS NECESSARY, SOMEONE SAID, OH, THEY HAVE TO HAVE THAT BIG TO MAKE IT AN ADVANTAGE FOR THE BUILDER TO MAKE MONEY, AND OF COURSE, THAT'S NOT TRUE BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE FOREVER AND IT'S GOING TO BE CHURNING OUT MONEY ALL THE TIME.

SO I DON'T WANT TO THINK FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LISTENING THAT IT'S PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT DEVELOPED.

THEY JUST WANT TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW IT'S DEVELOPED.

YOU CAN SEE THE THREE HOTELS THAT ARE ON SAN SEBASTIAN THERE, AND THEY ARE BIG AND BLOCK THE VIEW FROM OTHER PLACES.

IT'S JUST THAT WE'RE LOSING SOME OF THE SMALLNESS OF ST.

AUGUSTINE AND THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY LIKES AND WHY THEY COME HERE AND YOU CAN SEE THE SKY, AND WE ARE DOING AWAY WITH THAT BY ALLOWING TOO MANY OVERSIZE BUILDINGS THAT TAKE UP TOO MUCH OF THE PROPERTY, AND I HOPE WE DON'T HAVE ANY MORE HOTELS BECAUSE ALL OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS NOW ARE COMPETING FOR THOSE PEOPLE WITH AIRBNBS, BUT.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL KNOW WHY 60 AND 75 FEET, THOSE NUMBERS WERE INVOLVED IN THIS MOD. DO ANY OF YOU KNOW WHY? WE DON'T ANSWER QUESTIONS.

RIGHT. OKAY, SO YOU'RE GOING TO DISCUSS IT? YES, MA'AM. WELL, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. APPRECIATE YOUR CONCERN AND ALL YOU DO.

THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WISHES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? I DO NOT HAVE ANY OTHER CARDS.

SEEING NO ONE.

MS. SKINNER, LET ME ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, KIND OF FOUNDATIONAL QUESTIONS.

OBVIOUSLY, WE WE USE OTHER MODELS.

WE LOOK AT OTHER ZONING CODES.

SO COULD YOU GIVE US SOME INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT OTHER TYPES OF TRANSPORTATION ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE WHERE THOSE CAME FROM? AND THEN ALSO, I THINK MS. [INAUDIBLE] DOES RAISE A GOOD QUESTION.

WHAT'S THE MAGIC, IF YOU WOULD, IN THE 60 TO 75 FEET IN THOSE PARTICULAR NUMBERS? SO TWO PART QUESTION.

AS YOU KNOW, YOU PROBABLY KNOW PLANNERS TOO WELL.

WE STEAL SHAMELESSLY FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

OF COURSE. YOU KNOW, THE BASICALLY THE DISCUSSION IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A CRITICAL MASS OF DENSITY IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY A COMMUTER RAIL.

SO WE'RE WORKING BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS OF AN ISSUE.

JTA IN THE REGIONAL AGENCIES IN THIS AREA ARE BASICALLY AT A LOGJAM.

95 IS ALMOST MAXED OUT.

THEY ONLY HAVE A CERTAIN LIMIT OF RIGHT AWAY LEFT FROM THE ST AUGUSTINE AREA THROUGH JACKSONVILLE ONCE THEY WIDEN I-95.

TO THAT POINT, THERE IS NO MORE ROOM.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE REGIONAL AGENCIES, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, ARE REQUIRING THAT WE LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE FORMS OF TRANSPORTATION.

SO THAT'S, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, HOW THIS STARTED.

THAT IS FORCING THE CONVERSATION FOR COMMUTER RAIL, WHICH I CAN BE CORRECTED, BUT THAT'S FORCING THE CONVERSATION TO COMMUTER RAIL.

THERE'S AMPLE RIGHT OF WAY RELATED TO THE RAILROAD TRACKS.

SO THERE WERE SOME ANALYSIS THAT HAS BEEN DONE SINCE, I THINK BACK IN 2008 LOOKING AT COMMUTER RAIL.

THE THAT AREA HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS A POTENTIAL AREA FOR A COMMUTER RAIL STOP THE ANCHOR, IF YOU WILL, FROM JACKSONVILLE.

[01:25:02]

ST AUGUSTINE, RACE TRACK RD, THE AVENUES MALL IN DOWNTOWN.

THE COMMUTER RAIL IS ALSO BEING PROMOTED THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

WE KNOW THAT IN SOUTH FLORIDA AND IN CENTRAL FLORIDA.

COMMUTER RAIL IS LOOKING SERIOUSLY AS AS AN OPTION FOR TRANSPORTATION.

WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE'RE LIMITED IN SPACE.

I AGREE. SOME OF OUR APPEAL IS THAT WE'RE SMALL AND THAT WE HAVE A SMALLER SCALE.

THINGS NOW ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DONE TO SCALE.

WE'RE SUPPOSED TO RECOGNIZE THE SCALE THAT WE ARE.

WE HAVE RECOGNIZED FOR A LONG TIME THAT WE CANNOT WIDEN OUR ROADS.

YOU KNOW, IF WE WIDEN ROADS, THEN IT DESTROYS OUR CHARACTER, AND SO WE'RE KIND OF STUCK LOCALLY TO A CERTAIN EXTENT IS THE SAME AS 95 IS STUCK.

WE'RE LIMITED IN THE OPTIONS THAT WE CAN DO FOR ANY OF OUR CENTRAL CORRIDORS.

KING STREET, SAN MARCO, ANASTASIA BOULEVARD, ANY OF THE ROADS, RIBERIA STREET, [INAUDIBLE] ROAD.

WE ARE LIMITED NOT ONLY IN IN PROBABLY TECHNICALLY THE RIGHT OF WAY, BUT ALSO WHAT WE CAN DO BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO DESTROY THE GOLDEN EGG, SO TO SPEAK.

CITY MANAGER JOE [INAUDIBLE] USED TO TALK ABOUT THE GOLDEN EGG.

SO WE HAVE CERTAIN OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.

JTA IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY THAT LOCATION NEEDS A CERTAIN DENSITY WITHIN A CERTAIN WITHIN A QUARTER MILE AND ONE THIRD OF A MILE, AND SO THAT IS WHAT STARTED THE CONVERSATION ON UPPING THE DENSITY, IT'S ONLY A FIVE AND A HALF ACRE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

YOU'RE TRYING TO FIT DIFFERENT COMPONENTS ON IT, INCLUDING A PARKING GARAGE, WHICH FITS INTO THE CITY'S MOBILITY PLAN AS A PERIPHERAL PARKING GARAGE, AS A LOCATION FOR PEOPLE TO PARK AND USE THE TRANSIT, AS WELL AS OTHER MODES OF TRANSPORTATION.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT DENSITY AND YOU LOOK AT MIXED USE, WHERE YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND THEN OTHER USES AND MULTIFAMILY, THEN TO GET A CERTAIN JUSTIFIED NUMBER, YOU HAVE TO GO HIGHER AND THAT'S HOW YOU GET THERE. I'VE LOOKED IN ST JOHN'S COUNTY, THEY DO ALLOW 40 AND 45 FEET OF HEIGHT, BUT THEY ALSO ALLOW UP TO 60 FEET OF HEIGHT IN INCREMENTS BASED ON YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO YOUR SETBACKS.

SO, THERE'S MORE LAND IN ST JOHN'S COUNTY.

SO THEY SAY YOU CAN START AT 40 FEET.

IF YOU SET BACK AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET, THEN YOU GET AN ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET OF HEIGHT AND YOU CAN GET A TOTAL OF 20 MORE FEET.

SO YOU CAN GO UP TO 60 FEET IN ST JOHN'S COUNTY IF YOU PLAY WITH YOUR SETBACKS.

THEY I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE SO FAR THEY HAVE SO MUCH LAND, AND AS WAS STATED, YOU CAN EITHER GO HIGHER OR YOU CAN SPREAD OUT.

SO WHAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU TO SAY THEN IS THAT THE HEIGHT IN THE ORDINANCE IS BASED UPON AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE HAS TO BE A CERTAIN LEVEL OF DENSITY IN THE MODE TO JUSTIFY A COMMUTER RAIL STOP.

YES.

AND THAT INCLUDES WITHIN A CERTAIN RADIUS AS YOU I DON'T HAVE THE MAPS WITH ME, BUT IF YOU GO OUT A THIRD OF A MILE, THEN YOU KIND OF GO YOU INCLUDE OUT INTO WEST AUGUSTINE, YOU INCLUDE [INAUDIBLE] LANE AND ALL THAT PROPERTY.

YOU KIND OF INCLUDE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FLAGLER COLLEGE DORMS. SO IT'S ACCESSIBLE.

I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS.

SO YOU MADE AN IMPORTANT STATEMENT, WHICH IS AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, THE MOBILITY STATION CAN BE A TRANSIT STATION, A PARKING GARAGE OR A COMMUTER RAIL STATION.

YES, AND YOU SUGGESTED THAT WE SHOULD, AND I THINK I CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT LANGUAGE SHOULD BE CHANGED SUCH THAT IT MUST BE EITHER A COMMUTER RAIL STATION OR A PARKING GARAGE.

WELL, I WOULDN'T SAY EITHER, BUT I WOULD SAY IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED THAT WE MAKE THE PARKING GARAGE A MANDATORY COMPONENT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU HAVE THE RAIL STATION OR THE MOBILITY STATION.

I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

IN THE ORDINANCE, IN THE ZONING DEFINITION, WE USE AN AWFUL LOT OF OF TERM

[01:30:03]

A BICYCLE STATION, A TRANSIT STATION, A A PARK AND RIDE HUB, AND I THINK WE ALL KIND OF HAVE AN IDEA WHAT THOSE MIGHT BE, BUT IS THERE ANY MORE DEFINED, ANY MORE PRECISE DEFINITION OF ANY OF THESE TERMS? IN THE AUDIENCE, WE ARE GOING TO ADD SOME DEFINITIONS TO OUR DEFINITIONS IN OUR ZONING CODE.

IF WE DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC DEFINITION IN THE ZONING CODE, THEN YOU REFER TO A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THOSE ARE.

SO THERE ARE PLANNING TERMS THAT ARE COMMONLY DEFINED IN OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS [INAUDIBLE] THEN WE THEN SPECIFICALLY STATES WE WOULD REFER TO THOSE TO WHAT THEY ARE, BUT CERTAINLY WE CAN ADD MORE DEFINITIONS AND WE ARE ADDING FOUR OR FIVE OF THESE DEFINITIONS INTO OUR DEFINITION SECTION IN THE ZONING CODE.

OKAY, SO THAT WOULD COME TO US IN A SEPARATE ORDINANCE.

I BELIEVE YOU CAN DIRECT ME TO ADD THOSE DEFINITIONS INTO THIS ORDINANCE, OR IT COULD COME IN AT A LATER DATE IN OUR MOBILITY SECTION OF THE CODE.

WE HAVE ALSO IDENTIFIED SOME DEFINITIONS, SO I WOULD HAVE TO CROSS REFERENCE IF THEY'VE BEEN.

SUFFICE IT TO SAY IS TODAY WE HAVE TERMS THAT WHILE WE MAY HAVE A GENERAL IDEA, OUR CURRENT ZONING CODE DOES NOT PROVIDE A SPECIFIC DEFINITION FOR IT.

IS THAT CORRECT? ON SOME THINGS, AND ALSO, MAY I ADD STANDARDS? MINIMUM STANDARDS.

LET ME JUST FINISH.

SO WE HAVE TECHNICAL TERMS HERE.

YES. FOR WHICH WE HAVE NOT PROVIDED A DETAILED DEFINITION.

THAT'S A TRUE STATEMENT, PROBABLY.

YES. I WANT TO GO TO COMMISSIONER HORVATH AND THEN I'M GOING TO COME TO THE VICE MAYOR.

WHAT I WAS TRYING TO JUMP IN ON WAS YOUR POINT ABOUT THE DENSITY AND THE RADIUS AND THERE IS A RADIUS THAT YOU JUST OUTLINED.

SO ALL OF THAT DENSITY DOES NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN ON THESE FIVE ACRES.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY WHEN YOU BROUGHT IT UP, AND DURING THE DAY WE ALL GET BRIEFED ABOUT EVERY WEEK BEFORE THESE MEETINGS.

WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IT, I SAID THE MAIN IN MY MIND TWO BENEFITS FOR THIS MOD AT ITS LOCATION FOR THE CITY IS AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT AND A PARKING GARAGE, AND I WAS BOTHERED BY THE FACT THAT WE HAD OR, OR, OR.

IT'S I THINK CRITICAL THAT WE DO OUTLINE AND SAY MANDATORY FOR THE PARKING GARAGE.

SO THAT'S WHY SHE WAS BRINGING IT UP DURING THIS MEETING.

I'M SORRY THAT I WAS NOT HERE AT THE PREVIOUS MEETING ON THIS.

I DID WRITE A LETTER OUTLINING SOME OF MY CONCERNS.

I STILL HAVE THOSE CONCERNS.

WE KNOW OF ALL THE PROJECTS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, SAN SEBASTIAN.

ALL THE DIFFERENT HOTELS, EVERYTHING THAT IS FEEDING INTO THIS INTERSECTION, AND WE, IN MY MIND, HAVE A SAFETY CONCERN, WHICH WE MAY ADDRESS WHEN WE DO THE TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION STUDY, BUT WE'VE GOT A FIRE STATION THERE THAT FEEDS OUT ONTO KING STREET, AND WE KNOW DURING CERTAIN PARTS OF THE DAY OR CERTAIN WEEKENDS, YOU'RE WAITING IN TRAFFIC A LONG TIME, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING GARAGE AND ALL THESE HOUSING UNITS AND COMMERCIAL. I'M JUST REALLY CONCERNED THAT THE DENSITY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE LOT COVERAGE THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN QUESTIONS.

I DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT SOUND LIKE I'M NOT IN SUPPORT OF A MOD BECAUSE I AM.

I THINK THAT LOCATION IS FANTASTIC.

I THINK I SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE BRIGHT LINE DOWN AND FORT LAUDERDALE AND WEST PALM BEACH, AND IT'S REALLY A GREAT THING FOR THE COMMUNITY AND I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR US AS WELL, AND IT WOULD IT WOULDN'T GO OUT TO THE AIRPORT, I GUESS, AT LEAST FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, BUT I DO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT COULD PUT YOU AT A CERTAIN LOCATION IN JACKSONVILLE AND YOU COULD UBER WHEREVER YOU NEED TO GO.

SO IT'S A GOOD TIMING FOR THAT, I THINK, BUT I STILL HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS THAT I HAD WHEN I MENTIONED BEFORE.

I THINK THE 75 FEET IS WAY TOO HIGH.

I THINK THE 50 UNITS PER ACRE IS WAY TOO HIGH, AND I THINK THE 80% COVERAGE ON THAT LOT IS

[01:35:10]

IF WE HAVE GREEN SPACE, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD AT LEAST USE IT ON THE GROUND LEVEL, THE STREET LEVEL, TO GIVE SOME RELIEF TO PEOPLE WALKING TO AND FROM , BUT THE OTHER THING IS THIS PROJECT.

IT'S GOING TO DWARF THE WHOLE WEST AUGUSTINE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY THERE.

SO THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS.

I THINK WE HAVE A LONG WAYS TO GO TO BRING THIS DOWN INTO SOME SOMETHING THAT I COULD SUPPORT FOR THAT INTERSECTION.

VICE MAYOR SIKES-KLINE OKAY, SO, NUMBER ONE, I'M NOT SWAYED BY THE ARGUMENT BY JTA ABOUT COMMUTER RAIL AND I-95.

I THINK THAT FOR US TO CONSIDER THIS PROJECT THAT COMMUTER RAIL IS SO MANY YEARS IN THE FUTURE THAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD.

YES. SAY THAT IT COULD BE A FUTURE COMPONENT OF IT AND ALLOW FOR A FUTURE COMPONENT OF IT, BUT NOT BUILD A PROJECT AROUND THAT OR USE THAT AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, LOT COVERAGE OR DENSITY.

TWO, I THINK WE DO NEED TO REQUIRE A GARAGE.

I THINK THAT'S THE REAL, IF YOU WILL, AWAY EVERYTHING ELSE.

THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT'S REALLY ALL COMING DOWN TO IS WE'RE GOING TO GET A GARAGE.

PEOPLE NUMBER ONE THING THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT AND BESIDES HOMELESS IS PARKING AND TRAFFIC, AND WE'VE ALWAYS HAD THE VISION OF PUTTING A GARAGES OR GARAGES ON THE EDGES AND BRINGING PEOPLE IN.

SO THAT DOES MEET THAT CRITERIA.

SO I THINK THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING HERE.

THAT SHOULD BE THE BONES OF IT.

I THINK THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A REQUIRE, JUST LIKE THE DOT'S RECOMMENDING, BUT I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT OF US FOR THAT.

I'M SORRY, A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.

I THINK THAT WE DO HAVE A SET WE NEED A SET OF DEFINITIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, BIKE RACKS.

WE REQUIRE BIKE RACKS.

WELL, WE DID THAT IN THE PUD ORDINANCE.

IF YOU'LL REMEMBER COMMISSIONER HORVATH AND WELL, WITHOUT PUTTING IN SOME KIND OF MINIMUM STANDARDS, YOU'LL JUST GET A LITTLE RACK THAT YOU CAN PARK YOUR BIKES ON, YOU KNOW.

OH YEAH, WE'LL PUT BIKE RACKS IN, BUT WHAT DOES THAT REALLY GET YOU? WHAT DOES THAT REALLY ACCOMPLISH? SO I THINK THAT WE NEED SOME DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AROUND THOSE DEFINITIONS.

I ALSO WANT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT ARTICULATING ABOUT THIS IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF WEST AUGUSTINE AND HOW WEST AUGUSTINE IS GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THIS, HOW THE DISTRICT THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IS BASED ON. THE PRINCIPLE IS THAT THE ENTIRE AREA WILL RECEIVE A PUBLIC BENEFIT FOR THE FUTURE, AND I REALLY WANT TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT.

I HEAR TALK ABOUT CRA.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT ADDING A SIERRA THERE.

I SUPPORT THAT 100%.

I'M NOT SAYING IT CAN'T HAPPEN, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT IT.

I WOULD LIKE THE COMMUNITY TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THOSE THINGS BECAUSE IT MAY BE A VERY IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION FOR THAT, BUT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH. DETAILS THERE FOR US.

SO TO REALLY GET THROUGH IT.

THE HEIGHTS, THE DENSITY AND THE COVERAGE, THOSE WERE COMPATIBILITY ISSUES, AND I THINK THAT THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO IS WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS THROUGH THE LENS OF ONE, HOW IS INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACTED.

TWO, WHAT IS COMPATIBILITY AND WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THAT? WHICH WAS JUST REALLY WHAT I BROUGHT UP ABOUT WHAT ABOUT THE DISTRICT SURROUNDING WHAT ABOUT THAT RADIUS AND HOW IT'S GOING TO THAT DATA IS TALKING ABOUT AND THEN THE PUBLIC BENEFIT WHICH THERE'S SO MANY I MEAN, REALLY THIS IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT MOSTLY IS THE PUBLIC BENEFIT.

THERE ARE ENORMOUS PUBLIC BENEFITS IN THIS PROJECT.

SO ATTRACTIVE, SO HIGHLY ATTRACTIVE, BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT IGNORING THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACTS OR THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO TO ADDRESS COMPATIBILITY.

BECAUSE THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

YOU PUT 75 FEET ON THIS PROPERTY, ON THIS FIVE ACRES, AND AT THAT DENSITY LEVEL, AT THAT COVERAGE LEVEL, IT

[01:40:05]

YOU CANNOT ARGUE THAT IT'S IN ANY WAY COMPATIBLE.

SO WE HAVE TO WORK THIS OUT.

SO THAT'S MY IMPASSIONED SPEECH ABOUT IT.

I THINK WE HAVE WORK TO DO.

I'VE TALKED TO MR. [INAUDIBLE] AT LENGTH.

HE HAS BEEN VERY AMENABLE, VERY GRACIOUS.

HE HAS IS EAGER TO WORK WITH THE CITY.

I THINK THAT HE WANTS TO SEE A GOOD HE WANTS TO BE A PART OF THE COMMUNITY.

HE WANTS TO LEAVE A LEGACY AND ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO WORK WITH HIM.

I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SET IT AT 55 FEET AND KIND OF GO FROM THERE.

I'D LIKE TO SAY 55 FEET AND THEN SEE HOW WE CAN WORK THAT OUT JUST FOR ESTHETICS, AND LIKE I SAID, COMPATIBILITY ISSUES, AND THEN I HAVE ONE KIND OF SMALL ITEM, MAYBE IT'S NOT SO SMALL, BUT BECAUSE OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUE, WHICH WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS, IS THERE ENOUGH TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, FOR EXAMPLE, TO ACCOMMODATE THIS KIND OF POPULATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO BRING TO THIS CORNER AND KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING? BECAUSE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT INTERSECTION.

IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT PLACE FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE IN WEST AUGUSTINE AND OTHER AREAS MOVING INTO THE CITY.

SO ONE OF THE WAYS I THOUGHT MAYBE MIGHT HELP ADDRESS REDUCING CONGESTION NEAR THE INTERSECTION WAS THIS MAY SEEM SMALL, BUT ELIMINATING ANY PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT OR THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS DRIVE-THRUS, BUT.

YOU DON'T WANT TO KILL THE BUSINESSES.

MAYBE WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO IS SET ASIDE SOME CURBSIDE PICKUP, MAYBE SOME COMMON, BECAUSE THAT'S KIND OF A NEW PHENOMENON.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE NOTICED OR NOT, BUT NOWADAYS, PRETTY MUCH WHENEVER YOU GO ANYWHERE, THERE'S A FEW SPACES TAKEN UP RIGHT NEAR THE DOOR THAT ARE GOING TO BE CURBSIDE.

I'VE NOTICED IT AT TARGET WHERE IT STARTED OFF WITH A COUPLE LITTLE SPACES AND NOW THEY HAVE FIRST FEW ROWS ACTUALLY.

SO APPARENTLY IT'S A VERY POPULAR THING, BUT MAYBE WE COULD INCORPORATE CURBSIDE PICKUP INTO IT INSTEAD OF AND THEN JUST SAY NO USES WILL BE ALLOWED ON DRIVE THRUS ON THE SITE.

THAT'S JUST A SMALL RECOMMENDATION.

COVID DID THAT.

YEAH, IT'S A NEW NEW THING.

SO IT'S A NEW PHENOMENON, AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD PROBABLY HELP OUT IN A LITTLE BIT, AND THEN FURTHER TO DEFINE CURBSIDE PICK UP, SAY, AS 15 MINUTE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CALL IT CURBSIDE.

YOU CAN SAY 15 MINUTE PARKING--WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, BUT I KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE THERE FOR.

SO THANK YOU.

THAT'S KIND OF REALLY MY WRAP UP.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS.

THEN I'LL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY WHILE YOU CONTINUE TO THINK.

FIRST OF ALL, I DEFINITELY AGREE THAT THE PARKING GARAGE NEEDS TO GO ALONG WITH THE MOBILITY STATION AS REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF THIS NEW LAND USE CATEGORY.

VICE MAYOR I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE THAT THE JTA CAPACITY ARGUMENT IS IN QUESTION.

I THINK THEY MADE A VERY COMPELLING CASE AND I-95 IS ONLY SO WIDE IN TERMS OF THE OF THE AREA THAT THEY CAN OCCUPY. SO I THINK THAT THEY ARE VERY REAL IN THAT CAPACITY ARGUMENT, AND I ALSO THINK THAT THE TIMELINE IS REASONABLE. TEN YEARS IS WHAT THE GENTLEMAN SAID DURING THE PRESENTATION IN JULY.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S TOO LONG TO WAIT.

I WISH WE COULD DO IT TOMORROW, BUT WE DO NEED TO HAVE A LAND USE IN PLACE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO EVEN COMMIT TO DOING IT TO COME TO US AT ALL IF WE WANT LIGHT RAIL AND COMMUTER RAIL.

IN FACT, I WISH WE COULD GO BACK IN TIME AND BETTER PLAN FOR BOTH RESILIENCY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

TEN YEARS WOULD HAVE BEEN REALLY NICE TO HAVE THAT MUCH OF A HEADS UP.

SO I THINK THAT TEN YEARS IS MORE THAN ADEQUATE IN TERMS OF WE WE NEED TO GO WITH THAT.

I THINK THAT'S REASONABLE.

AS I STATED DURING THE FIRST READING BACK IN JULY, THE CHANGES FOR THE TWO ORDINANCES THAT ARE COMING TO US ARE DIRECTLY IN KEEPING WITH OUR MOBILITY PLAN AS YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US IN THE PACKAGE.

OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS YOU'VE PRESENTED TO US IN OUR IN THE PACKAGE AND ALSO OUR RECENTLY ADOPTED MOBILITY ORDINANCE AND FEE, THEY'RE RIGHT IN LINE.

[01:45:01]

THESE CHANGES WILL RESULT IN A NEW ZONING CATEGORY THAT ACTUALLY ENCOURAGES RESIDENTIAL RATHER THAN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AS IT IS CURRENTLY SLOTTED TO BE BOTH IN LAND USE AND ZONING.

I FEEL LIKE WE ALREADY HAVE PLENTY OF HOTELS AND WHEN WE GET TO THIS SECOND ORDINANCE THEY ARE SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED INFILL DEVELOPMENT.

WE'RE BEGINNING TO TALK ABOUT IT.

WE'RE BEGINNING TO GET OUR HEADS AROUND IT, BUT IT'S A REAL OPPORTUNITY, AND THIS LAND USE CATEGORY WOULD CAPITALIZE ON THAT, ENABLING NUMEROUS SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC BENEFITS, IN MY OPINION, AND WOULD HELP MOVE THIS CITY TOWARD OUR GOALS FOR REDUCING URBAN SPRAWL, ADDRESSING HOUSING ISSUES, IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION AND MOBILITY, AND REDUCING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.

WE HAVEN'T BROUGHT THAT UP YET.

I'M GOING TO GO FURTHER ON THAT POINT.

WE SIMPLY HAVE TO HAVE THE DENSITY TO COUNTER THE URBAN SPRAWL WE'VE CREATED IN THIS CITY AND IN THIS COUNTY, AND I KIND OF I'D LIKE TO INVITE YOU TO ENVISION THE FOLLOWING.

NUMBER ONE, A PARK ONCE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT ENCOURAGES MORE WALKING, BICYCLING AND LIGHT RAIL COMMUTING THAT WOULD EMERGE.

SERVICES SUCH AS GROCERIES, HARDWARE, PHARMACIES AND SO ON WOULD BE LIKELY TO COME BACK TO THE WEST AUGUSTINE AND DOWNTOWN AREA.

OUR DOWNTOWN WOULD BECOME A MORE BALANCED MIX OF VISITORS, AND RESIDENTS EMPHASIS ON THE BALANCE.

I READ AN ARTICLE A WEEK AGO IN THE NEW YORK TIMES.

IT'S TITLED A KEY TO CONTROLLING EMISSIONS: MORE BUILDINGS IN THE CITY'S UNUSED SPACES, AND IT'S BY PETER WILSON.

IT WAS PUBLISHED ON THE 20TH OF THIS MONTH.

IT HIGHLIGHTS ANOTHER PUBLIC BENEFIT THAT I REALLY HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT, AND I'M QUOTING THE LATEST REPORT OF THE UN'S INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE SAID ONE OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAYS TO CUT THE CARBON EMISSIONS OF CITIES WAS TO STOP THE RELENTLESS EXPANSION OF URBAN SPRAWL BY PROMOTING INFILL HOUSING, THE CAREFULLY PLANNED CREATION OF EXTRA HOUSING IN UNDERUTILIZED PARTS OF CITIES TO REDUCE CAR DEPENDENCE AND IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENERGY USE, UNQUOTE. THE AUTHOR ALSO QUOTED PETER NEUMANN, A PROFESSOR OF SUSTAINABILITY AT CURTIN UNIVERSITY IN AUSTRALIA, AS SAYING, QUOTE, THE HARD TRUTH IS THAT WE NEED TO STOP BUILDING NEW HOMES 30 MILES FROM WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED.

AS A RESULT OF OUR DOING THIS, WE'RE FACING DOWN THE BARREL OF A HURRICANE THAT WILL HAVE MAJOR IMPACTS ON THIS STATE.

THERE IS A CLIMATE CRISIS AND WE NEED TO DO OUR PART TO ADDRESS IT, AND IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO START NOW.

I THINK THIS INFILL IS ESSENTIAL.

I THINK THIS TRANSPORTATION THIS I'M SORRY, THIS MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IS ESSENTIAL, AND THEREFORE, I SUPPORT BOTH OF THESE ORDINANCES, BUT I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE DROP THE HEIGHT DOWN TO 65 FEET.

COULD I JUST ADD ONE MORE THING? WHEN WE WERE TALKING, I THINK WE'VE ALL HEARD THAT WE ALL AGREE THAT A PUBLIC PARKING GARAGE SHOULD BE IN AS MANDATORY.

I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO PIN DOWN WHAT THE NUMBER OF CARS WOULD BE BECAUSE WE HAVE A RANGE FROM 200 TO 800, AND THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

SO WHEN WE APPROVE THIS, I'D LIKE TO APPROVE IT AT 800 OR.

SOME HIGHER NUMBER.

YES, MR. LOPEZ.

I WOULD JUST CAUTION ON THAT, BECAUSE THAT NUMBER IS YET TO BE DEVELOPED BY OUR OWN CONSULTANTS ON WHAT OUR NEEDS ARE.

SO IF YOU HAVE A STATIC NUMBER, THAT MAY NOT BE EITHER WHAT THE CITY CAN AFFORD OR ACTUALLY NEEDS, WE'VE RETAINED A CONSULTANT TO GENERATE THAT NUMBER. I THINK THAT'S GREAT, BUT I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE IT'S GOING TO BE AS LOW AS 200.

I MEAN, WE ALREADY PARK ON THAT PROPERTY 400 AND EVENT TIMES, SO, BUT ANYWAY, THAT'S GREAT THAT THEY'LL ADVISE US ON THAT.

OKAY, FURTHER DISCUSSION, FURTHER DEBATE.

ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS ABOUT THERE SEEMS TO BE IS THERE AN IMPRESSION OR IS THIS FACTUAL? HAVE THERE BEEN PROMISES MADE ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS A COMPONENT OF THIS PROJECT? I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSUMPTIONS.

THE MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT IS MANDATORY, SO YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE MULTIFAMILY.

THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, THERE IS NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT.

SO THAT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE CONVERSATION OR IN THE COMMUNITY'S MIND.

THERE IS NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT WHATSOEVER IN THIS.

[01:50:04]

IT'S NOT A REQUIRED ELEMENT OF THIS ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.

DO THEY EVER HAVE IT IN MODS? DO THEY EVER. AFFORDABLE HOUSING? WHY ARE WE NOT REQUIRING IT FOR OUR MOD.

REGARDLESS OF WHERE IT IS, IF IT'S NORTH CITY OR IF IT'S [INAUDIBLE] I THINK WE'VE GOT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROBLEM.

SO WHY ARE WE NOT ADDRESSING IT AS A BENEFIT TO THE CITY.

I BELIEVE THAT THE BENEFIT THAT'S BEING PROVIDED TO THE CITY, THAT THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MAKING THESE AGREEMENTS OR HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS FEEL THAT THE PARKING GARAGE IS THE BENEFIT.

THAT'S TRUE. THAT WARRANTS 75 FEET, 80% LOT COVERAGE AND 50 UNITS PER ACRE. YOU AND I DON'T THINK WE AGREE THAT'S IT THAT IT WARRANTS, AND I THINK IT IS A GOOD QUESTION ABOUT HOW MANY PARKING SPACES, AND I'M TOLD THERE WILL BE A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT.

SO I THINK I'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THAT.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THE PUBLIC IT HAS BEEN PART OF THE DISCUSSION HERE TODAY IS THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE OUTLINE AND WHAT IT'S GOING TO OUTLINE.

SO I'D LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT.

RIGHT. AGAIN, REMEMBER, WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT A SPECIFIC PROPERTY OWNERS PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS, THE FOUR CORNERS OF THIS ORDINANCE.

SO NO, WE DON'T HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE THAT'S A SEPARATE DOCUMENT THAT WILL COME FORWARD AT YOUR NEXT TWO MEETINGS.

SO YOU WILL HAVE THOSE DETAILS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT.

A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT AN OVERARCHING DOCUMENT IN A COMP PLAN CHANGE.

IT'S SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR PROJECT.

THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT IN HERE.

SO TODAY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE CITY CREATING A NEW FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION WITH CERTAIN CRITERIA AND THE CITY AMENDING ITS ZONING CODE WITH A NEW CATEGORY WITH CERTAIN CRITERIA.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF OVERLAP BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE THINKING OF THE PARTICULAR PROJECT, BUT THOSE DETAILS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PROJECT ARE COMING UP IN YOUR NEXT TWO MEETINGS. THE I'D ALSO LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THE SEEM TO ZONING, WHICH IS CURRENTLY WHAT IT IS, ALLOWS 75% LOT COVERAGE.

SO THE 80% IS NOT A HUGE LEAP FROM WHAT IS ALREADY PERMITTED ON THAT PROPERTY, BUT BACK TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, IF WE'RE CREATING THIS MOD AND OTHER MODS HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PARTS TO IT, SHOULD WE NOT BE THINKING ABOUT THAT SINCE THAT'S PART OF OUR [INAUDIBLE].

CERTAINLY WE CAN AS FAR AS OUR MY PERSPECTIVE SO FAR IS WE NEED MORE UNITS.

SO THE MORE UNITS THAT WE HAVE, THEN YOU HAVE MORE HOUSING OPTIONS AND HOPEFULLY THINGS EVENTUALLY THE MARKET WILL BECOME MORE AFFORDABLE. THE MORE UNITS THAT WE HAVE, IT'S THERE'S AN AFFORDABILITY FACTOR AS WELL AS AS NOT HAVING TO COMMUTE.

SO IF YOU DO WORK IN TOWN AND YOU LIVE THERE AND YOU CAN WALK AND BIKE DOWNTOWN, THEORETICALLY, THEN YOU ARE ELIMINATING YOUR COMMUTE FROM PALATKA OR GREEN COVE OR WHATEVER.

SO THAT PLAYS INTO AN AFFORDABILITY.

I DO THAT.

I DO THAT. WE HAVE ONE CAR AT OUR HOUSE FOR OUR FAMILY, AND IT'S BECAUSE WE LIVE CLOSE ENOUGH TO WHERE I WORK THAT I CAN WALK AND BIKE TO WORK.

SO I AGREE THAT IS A HUGE ELEMENT OF AFFORDABILITY.

OKAY, MR. REGAN.

MAYBE I COULD HELP A LITTLE BIT, MAYOR, WITH THE CONVERSATION EARLY ON, THE JTA, THE DESIGNERS, THE INVOLVEMENT WAS A CONSTANT PRESS ABOUT THEORY OF TODD AND DENSITY AND IT WAS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK YOUR COMMUNITY CAN TOLERATE? TO ME, THE 75 FEET IS LIKE PROBABLY MORE THAN THE COMMUNITY CAN TOLERATE BASED ON THE CONVERSATION AND EVERY TEN FEET THINK OF IT AS ANOTHER FLOOR.

SO IN MODS THAT HAVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR IN IN URBAN SETTINGS, THEY OFTEN REALLY STEP UP THE DENSITY QUITE A BIT AND THEREFORE THE HEIGHT.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING INITIATIVES IN URBAN CENTERS LIKE WEST PALM OR MIAMI, THEY REALLY JUMP THE HEIGHT, YOU KNOW, ADD MULTIPLE FLOORS TO SKYSCRAPERS AND SO FORTH.

THESE ARE PRETTY SMALL APARTMENTS, WHETHER THE HEIGHT IS 65 OR 75 FEET.

THEY ARE BY DESIGN TO BE SMALL AND NOT AT THE PRICE POINT, AND WE'VE ALWAYS SAID THAT IT'S

[01:55:06]

THE DETAIL OF THE [INAUDIBLE] AS A DEVELOPMENT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD LOOK AT.

I JUST WANT TO STRESS THE POINT OF MISS LOPEZ ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS ABOUT CREATING A ZONING CLASS, AND WHY IS THERE ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT? THE THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE IN THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT IS COMMERCIAL USES, AND SO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS THAT YOU DON'T SEE PEOPLE BUYING PROPERTY AND THINKING OF DOING RESIDENTIAL, THEY'RE BUILDING HOTELS BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE FINANCIAL YIELD IS.

THESE MODS ARE DESIGNED SO THAT A DEVELOPER CAN THINK OR CAN CONSIDER A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND STILL HAVE A PROFORMA THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY APPROACH WHAT YOU MIGHT YIELD FROM A COMMERCIAL POINT OF VIEW, BUT HELPS THAT OFFSET AND SO THE KEY TO BRINGING BACK WALKABILITY AND ALL THESE PRINCIPLES THAT COMMISSIONER BLONDER ARTICULATED SO WELL IS RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, AND I ALWAYS SAY IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A WALKABLE CITY, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE SOMETHING TO WALK TO, AND YOU START BY BRINGING BACK RESIDENTS INTO THE URBAN CORE, AND SO THIS MOD DOESN'T ALLOW, AS I UNDERSTAND, HOTELS, RIGHT, AMY? THAT'S CORRECT. THERE'S NO HOTELS.

IT IS FOCUSED ON MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL.

THIS IS THE CREME DE LA CREME OF URBAN PLANNING, IF YOU WILL, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S YOUR JOB TO FINALLY DECIDE THE COMMUNITY STANDARD, AND I'M GOING TO JUST SAY JUST GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE STANDARD NOW 65 AND KEEP HAVING THIS CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT WILL WORK.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'M ALMOST SORRY THAT AT ANY POINT WE SUPPORTED 75 FEET, BUT THE IDEA WAS THAT IT WAS JUST A SMALL TOLERANCE DIFFERENCE OVER SOME OF THE BIGGER BUILDINGS THAT YOU SEE, AND WE PUT IT TO THE PUBLIC TEST AND IT SEEMS TO BE STRUGGLING.

SO KEEP THAT IN MIND.

I HAVE A QUESTION, AMY.

DO YOU HAVE WITH YOU THE COMPARISON OF THE HEIGHT OF TRIP AND FCC OR FPC BUILDINGS AND WHICH IS FLAGLER [INAUDIBLE]? I HAVE A LIST.

[INAUDIBLE] IF YOU CAN PUT UP THE SO WE DID GET SOME NUMBERS RELATED TO THE OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE AREA.

THE TRIP HOTEL IS IS THE 33 SOUTH PONCE.

IT'S 65 FEET TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF.

THE PONCE STREET HOTELS ARE 50 FEET.

WITH SOME APPURTENANCES.

THE FEC RAILROAD BUILDINGS ARE 60 TO 70 FEET WITH IF YOU INCLUDE THE PROJECTIONS ON TOP, THE PROPOSED SEBASTIAN PROJECT WOULD BE PRESUMABLY 50 FEET.

THE METHODIST CHURCH 40 TO 50.

MEMORIAL PRESBYTERIAN 85 TO THE BASE OF THE DOME [INAUDIBLE] HALL IS 107 TO THE SOLARIUM, 130 TO THE TOP OF THE BELL TOWERS, APPROXIMATELY, AND THE CATHEDRAL 24 CATHEDRAL PLACE IS ACTUALLY 110 TO 130 TO THE TOP OF THE PROJECTIONS IN CITY HALL RIGHT HERE IS BETWEEN 60 AND 75 FEET TO THE TOP OF THE OF THE TOWERS.

SO THOSE ARE EXISTING BUILDINGS WITHIN A REASONABLE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY.

[02:00:02]

SO THERE IS HEIGHT THAT EXISTS IN THE CITY.

WE DON'T WANT TO DETRACT FROM THIS CITY SKYLINE, BUT AT THE SAME POINT, YOU KNOW, WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE UNITS.

WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS.

SO CONCERNING THE LIST.

SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE ESTABLISH WHAT WE MEAN BY 65 FEET.

THAT LIST IS KIND OF ALL OVER THE PLACE AS FAR AS WHETHER IT'S GOING TO THE TOP OF THE ROOF.

BECAUSE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOTEL NOW, WE'RE COLLEGE DORMITORIES THAT YOU'RE SAYING 65 FEET TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF. BUT IS IT A 60 FOOT BUILDING AND FIVE FEET FOR THE ROOF OR IS IT A 55 FOOT BUILDING WITH [INAUDIBLE] THE ROOF? [INAUDIBLE] LET'S BE CONSISTENT IN HOW WE ARTICULATE THAT, AND WHEN I SAY 55 FEET WHAT I SUPPORT, THE REASON I'M USING THAT NUMBER IS BECAUSE I KNOW THAT MY PAST HISTORY IS FOLKS ALWAYS COME TO US AND SAY, WELL, WE WANT TO MAKE IT LOOK PRETTY, SO GIVE US AN EXTRA FIVE OR TEN FEET.

SO HELP ME GET THAT NARROWED DOWN SO WE CAN ALL BE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING, AND I DO WANT TO GIVE FLEXIBILITY FOR APPURTENANCES, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO CALL IT, OR EMBELLISHMENTS FOR THAT, BUT I REALLY LOVE TO JUST REALLY TALK ABOUT 55 FEET IS THAT'S THE HEIGHT OF IT OR WHATEVER YOU WANT [INAUDIBLE] TALK ABOUT THE SAME THING.

RIGHT, I AGREE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CURRENT CODE ALLOWS FOR 35 FEET IN MOST AREAS, 50 FEET IN OTHER AREAS.

THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION THAT ALLOWS FOR ELEVATOR TOWERS, APPURTENANCES AND OTHER THINGS THAT GOES TO 55 FEET.

SO I GUESS I WOULD SAY REALLY ACCORDING TO THE CODE, THESE HEIGHTS, EVEN 65 FEET ARE ALREADY BEYOND KIND OF THE RECOGNITION FOR APPURTENANCES. SO THIS 65 FEET OR 75 FEET WOULD BE MEASURED TO THE HIGHEST POINT.

SO ANY KIND OF ARTICULATION OR APPURTENANCES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THAT 75 FEET BECAUSE OUR DEFINITION OF HEIGHT GOES TO THE HIGHEST POINT. YES.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2022-14 WITH THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT CAPPED AT 65 FEET AND WITH THE REVISION TO THE LANGUAGE THAT REQUIRES THAT A PARKING GARAGE BE A REQUIRED ELEMENT.

SECOND. THIS IS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

THERE, I THINK, ARE SOME ADDITIONAL THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ZONING CATEGORY.

MOTION AND A SECOND.

ORDINANCE, PLEASE.

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022-14.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2040 TO PROVIDE A LAND USE CATEGORY REFERRED TO AS MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES.

PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

DISCUSSION. I'D LIKE TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF UNITS, 50 UNITS PER ACRE.

THAT'S 250 HOUSING UNITS ON THIS PROPERTY.

I THINK IT'S EXCESSIVE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST WE DROP IT TO 30.

SO AT 30, THAT'S STILL ALMOST DOUBLE OF WHAT OUR MAXIMUM DENSITY IS.

THAT'S MORE THAN DOUBLE.

WELL, YEAH, WELL, THE DOWNTOWN IS 24, BUT DO WE HAVE MUCH OF THAT? I DON'T EVEN KNOW THAT WE HAVE THAT.

THAT CALCULATION IS AN OVERALL LAND AREA FOR THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS.

SO IT BASICALLY EQUALS OUT TO 24 UNITS PER ACRE.

SOME AREAS MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON ST GEORGE STREET WHEN YOU INCLUDE ALL THE APARTMENTS ABOVE SOME.

SOME ARE LESS IN, AND YOU'RE PROPOSING 30.

IF WE WERE TO I'M SORRY, IS THAT I WAS GOING TO SAY WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.

SO IF WE WISH TO REDUCE IT, I'M ASSUMING THAT COMMISSIONER HORVATH HAS MADE A MOTION TO REDUCE.

SO THEN WE WOULD NEED A SECOND, AND THEN WE WILL VOTE ON THAT AS AN AMENDMENT TO MY MOTION.

I'M TRYING TO KEEP US FOCUSED SO WE CAN WALK THROUGH THIS DECISION BEFORE US.

[02:05:06]

IS THERE A SECOND? THE MOTION FAILS FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WELL, THE REASON I DIDN'T SECOND THAT IS BECAUSE I'M STILL HUNG UP ON 55 FEET AND DEFINITIONS.

WELL NOW WE HAVE TWO ISSUES ON THE TABLE.

I. WOULD ANYBODY CONSIDER 35 UNITS PER ACRE? SO COMMISSIONER HORVATH'S MADE A MOTION TO AMEND MY MOTION TO PROVIDE FOR 35 UNITS PER ACRE.

DOES ANYBODY CHOOSE TO SECOND THAT MOTION? THE MOTION FAILS, AND AGAIN, LIKE I SAID, I'M STILL HUNG UP ON 55 ON THE 65 FEET VERSUS 55.

SO ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION TO 55 FEET? I'LL BE HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AMEND THE MOTION TO 55 FEET.

I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? I HAVE A SECOND. GREAT.

DO I HAVE FURTHER DEBATE ON THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT TO MY MOTION? I WOULD GO BACK TO THE NEED FOR INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND THE DENSITY REQUIRED TO MEET THE GOALS OF THIS ENTIRE ORDINANCE AND ZONING CATEGORY AND LAND USE CHANGE.

SO IF WE DON'T HAVE THE DENSITY, WE DON'T HAVE THE LIGHT RAIL, WE HAVE THE COMMERCIAL MEDIUM, WE GET A HOTEL TOMORROW. NO, AND WE COULD, AND THAT'S WHAT I FEAR.

SO I CANNOT SUPPORT EITHER THE DECREASE IN HEIGHT FROM THE MAYOR'S MOTION, NOR CAN I SUPPORT THE DECREASE IN DENSITY.

OKAY, SO WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE TABLE AND IT'S BEEN SECONDED.

IS THERE FURTHER DEBATE ON THE MOTION? SEEING NONE. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, AND THAT MOTION WAS THE VICE MAYOR'S MOTION TO REDUCE FROM 65 TO 55 FEET.

CORRECT? CORRECT, AND THAT FAILED, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? NO [INAUDIBLE] CAN WE VOTE AGAIN ON THE REDUCED DENSITY? ONE THING AT A TIME. WE HAVE A PENDING AMENDMENT.

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

FAILS 3 TO 2.

IS THERE FURTHER DEBATE? WELL, I CAN SEE HOW THIS IS GOING.

I THINK WE CAN COUNT.

IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH.

OKAY, [INAUDIBLE]JUST GO AHEAD AND CALL THE VOTE.

OKAY, SO WE ARE NOW BACK ON MY ORIGINAL MOTION TO APPROVE.

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THE ORDINANCE PASSES.

OKAY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.

WE ARE NOW ON ITEM 8(A)(2), WHICH IS ORDINANCE 2022-15, WHICH

[8.A.2. Ordinance 2022-15: Creates a new Zoning District called Mobility Oriented Development (MOD). (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

THIS IS SECOND READING IN A PUBLIC HEARING.

IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.

MS. SKINNER WE'RE, OF COURSE, PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THIS, AS IS THE PUBLIC, BUT JUST EXPLAIN THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT WE JUST DID AND WHAT WE'D BE FACING HERE.

YES YOUR PREVIOUS ACTION ACTUALLY CREATES A LAND USE CATEGORY TO BE INSERTED INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S KIND OF THE OVERALL PLAN FOR THE CITY.

IT'S AN OPTION THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO LOOK AT, AND IT WORKS WITH ANY OF OUR OTHER OVERALL LAND USE CATEGORIES. SO IT'S A BROADER STATEMENT OF WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE.

THIS ORDINANCE IS RELATED TO A COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT THAT IS KIND OF MORE DAY TO DAY ON THE GROUND WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY.

IF THE PROPERTY IS ZONED TO THIS ZONING DISTRICT, IT LISTS, PERMITTED, USES SPECIFICALLY.

IT LISTS CERTAIN TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS LIKE SETBACKS, HEIGHT, DENSITY, LOT COVERAGE.

THIS SPECIFIC ORDINANCE ALSO REQUIRES THAT IF A PROPERTY IS IN AN AREA THAT HAS DESIGN STANDARDS, THAT IT

[02:10:01]

SO THERE ARE TEN KIND OF PROVISIONS.

SIX WOULD BE REQUIRED IF WE ADD THE PARKING GARAGE REQUIREMENT OUT OF THE TEN, AND THEN THEY HAVE A COUPLE OF OPTIONAL OTHER THINGS THAT RELATE TO MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, AND AT THIS JUNCTURE, I DO NOT I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AT THIS JUNCTURE, I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS.

WILL' MS. [INAUDIBLE], PLEASE COME FORWARD.

THIS IS ON THE ZONING SO WE CAN GET INTO THE USES, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. I AGREE WITH SIKES-KLINE.

WE NEED TO SINCE THIS IS GOING TO BE A MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A GARAGE AND YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE A SHUTTLE SYSTEM.

SO THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC COMING AND GOING, AND IT SEEMS LIKE SINCE THE IDEA BEHIND IT IS TO LOWER THE USE OF TRAFFIC.

IN ADDITION TO GETTING RID OF DRIVE THRU FACILITIES, IT SEEMS LIKE YOU NEED TO ALSO GET RID OF.

THINGS LIKE ART STUDIO, DANCE AND MUSIC STUDIO, HEALTH CLUB FACILITIES BECAUSE THOSE HAVE HIGH TURNOVER AND TRAFFIC.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE COMING AND GOING, YOU KNOW, BEING A GYM, BEING A CLASS MOM AND DAD, PICKING UP THE KID, DROPPING THEM OFF.

WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF PLACES ALL OVER TOWN TO HAVE THOSE KIND OF USES AND IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE NEED TO HAVE THAT IN THERE BECAUSE IT JUST SEEMS TO ADD TO THE DRIVING PROBLEMS ALONG WITH DRIVE IN BANKS AND DRIVE THRU RESTAURANTS AND ALL THAT.

I'M ASSUMING WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OFF THE DRY CLEANING AND LAUNDRY PACKAGING PLANT AND IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THE SHORT TERM RENTALS, NOT ALLOWING SHORT TERM RENTALS THERE? MAKE THIS AN HOA WHERE IT DOES NOT ALLOW THEM SINCE THEY'RE GOING TO BE WRITE THAT INTO THE AGREEMENT, AND ALSO, I'D LIKE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE PERVIOUS PATHS.

DOES THAT MEAN THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH MULCH PATHS? DID WE NEED TO DEFINE THAT BETTER? THEN WE'VE GOT THE CARS AND A RIDE SHARING HUB OR DEDICATED LOADING AREA.

SEEMS LIKE WE NEED MORE SPECIFICS ON THAT.

A PARK AND RIDE HUB WHERE I AM ASSUMING THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING IN THE PUBLIC GARAGE AND RIDING IS THAT OF REFERRING TO THE PUBLIC SHUTTLE SYSTEM.

AGAIN, SOME OF THIS STUFF NEEDS TO BE FLESHED OUT.

A LOT MORE CHARGING STATIONS.

NO IDEA OF HOW MANY CHARGING STATIONS ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED.

THERE'S A LOT OF SETBACKS.

ALSO, YOU'VE GOT ZERO SETBACKS ON THIS LOT.

SEEMS LIKE EVERYTHING FACING KING STREET.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A 65 FOOT BUILDING NOW, RIGHT ON KING STREET, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT.

ONE THING SARAH RYAN RECOMMENDED WAS THAT ON KING STREET YOU HAVE STEP BACK THAT WAS NEVER INCORPORATED, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A SUGGESTION INTO THE READING OF IT.

BUT KEEP THE 35 FEET ON KING AND THEN STEP BACK TO YOUR HIGHER BUILDINGS SO THAT THE CHARACTER OF KING IS KEPT IN LINE. THIS IS GOING TO AT MOST, KING IS REALLY ONLY TWO STORY, NOT EVEN 35 FEET.

SO YOU'VE GOT A LOT MORE WORK TO DO.

THANK YOU.

MR. MAYOR.

YES. DID YOU WANT TO MENTION THAT IT HAS CORRIDOR REVIEW? THAT'S ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.

THANK YOU. MY NEXT SPEAKER IS MS. BJ KALAIDI.

BJ KALAIDI WEST CITY ST AUGUSTINE 8 NEWCOMB ST AND I HAD THAT ON MY OTHER CARD, BUT I DID FILL OUT ANOTHER CARD.

THAT'S FINE. THANK YOU.

OKAY, THE INFLUENCE OF OUTSIDE LAWYERS CHANGING OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ADDING NEW ZONING DISTRICTS CONTINUES TO DESTROY THE CHARACTER OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE. VOTE NO ON ORDINANCE 2022-15.

YOU KNOW, I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT OUT LOUD.

EVERYBODY'S THINKING IT, BUT WE ALL KNOW DEEP DOWN THAT.

[02:15:02]

THIS HAS BEEN PUSHED THROUGH EVERYTHING THE PZB BROUGHT THROUGH THERE, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 65 FEET.

WELL, WE'LL SEE WHAT GOES ON, AND I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE ON KING STREET AND WILL THEY BE ABLE TO COME OFF OF US ONE INTO THE PROPERTY.

BUT I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC ON KING STREET FROM US, ONE TO, LET'S SAY, NOT EVEN AS FAR DOWN MAYBE TO LEONARDI.

YOU ALL KNOW WHERE LEONARDI IS AND DAVIS STREET, ONE WAY STREETS OVER THERE.

I THINK THIS IS REALLY GOING TO TOTALLY, TOTALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER, AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF YOU, MAYBE MR. VALDES, BUT NONE OF YOU REALLY LIVE IN THAT AREA HEAVILY NOW AND COME AND SEE WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE ALL THE TIME.

SO I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT THIS IS GOING THROUGH FOR THIS CITY.

I THINK IT IS NOT NEEDED.

I KNOW YOU TALK ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING, BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE IN HERE AND WE KEEP ON TALKING ABOUT THAT.

SO I KNOW IT WILL BE PASSED, BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS DOING US ANY GOOD AS A TOWN FOR THE QUALITY OF LIFE AND FOR THE CHARACTER.

THAT'S WHY PEOPLE COME HERE BECAUSE OF THIS SMALL TOWN AND WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THIS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I DO NOT HAVE ANY OTHER CARDS.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? SEEING NO ONE ELSE, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

SKINNER, HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND THE CORRELATION BETWEEN THE HEIGHTS.

THIS IS ON WHAT APPEARS TO BE PAGE 11, AT LEAST OF MY PACKET.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS YOU AT ALL.

IT'S SUBSECTION NINE ABOUT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHTS OF STRUCTURES AND THE CORRELATION WITH THE ENTRY CORRIDOR PROVISIONS.

YES. I BELIEVE I HAVE IT THAT [INAUDIBLE] CAN PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN AS I GET TO IT.

EXCUSE ME. YES, YOU JUST PASSED IT.

GO BACK. OH, SORRY.

I WAS THINKING. THERE YOU ARE.

SO BASICALLY THIS ESTABLISHES THAT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD BE 60 FEET IN BOTH OF THESE AREAS WHERE THIS ZONING DISTRICT WOULD APPLY IF AT THE TIME AND WE CAN ADJUST.

BASED ON YOUR PREVIOUS ACTION, YOU COULD REQUEST 75 FEET OF HEIGHT IF YOU WERE IN AN AREA THAT HAS DESIGNED STANDARDS WHICH KING STREET DOES.

WE HAVE KING STREET DESIGN STANDARDS THAT GO THE LENGTH OF KING STREET ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE CITY LIMITS ON THE WEST CITY LIMITS.

SO THE IDEA IS YOU'D HAVE 60 FEET.

THEN IF YOU'RE IN THE DESIGN CORRIDOR, THEN YOU COULD GO TO 75 IF YOU COMPLIED WITH THE DESIGN STANDARDS.

THERE ARE IN THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR KING STREET, THERE ARE CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR KIND OF ARTICULATION BUILDINGS ON THE FRONT, UP TO THE STREET RELATION THAT GIVES YOU A RELATIONSHIP OF THE BUILDINGS TO THE STREET, AND ALSO IF I SCROLL DOWN, THEN THERE ARE SPECIFIC FIVE OR SIX SPECIFIC ASPECTS OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT THE PROJECT MUST COMPLY WITH.

IF YOU'RE NOT IN AN AREA THAT HAS A DESIGN STANDARD, THEN NORTH OF TOWN YOU HAVE 60 FEET OF HEIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO GO TO 75 FEET OF HEIGHT, YOU'D HAVE TO REZONE TO A PUD AND THE PUD HAS TO INCORPORATE DESIGN STANDARDS . THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN THE DESIGN STANDARDS BECAUSE.

UM, BASICALLY NOT ALL OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS COULD APPLY BECAUSE THE EAST SIDE OF KING STREET HAS MORE RESIDENTIAL TYPE DEVELOPMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO WE ACTUALLY WROTE IN THE STANDARDS THAT WOULD APPLY.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

SO MY SENSE IS THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT, THE STRUCTURES HERE SHOULD REMAIN AT 65 FEET PERIOD, AND LET'S DELETE ANY REFERENCE TO THE 75.

YES, WELL, 75 AS WELL AS THAT.

IT'S GOT TO BE COVERED.

THAT'S CORRECT. LEGALLY, YOU COULD NOT HAVE SOMETHING IN YOUR ZONING THAT GIVES RIGHTS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT YOUR COMP PLAN IS.

SO BECAUSE AT YOUR PRIOR VOTE YOU REDUCED FROM 75 TO 65, ALL THOSE 75 NUMBERS IN THIS ORDINANCE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE REDUCED

[02:20:08]

I THINK IT JUST MAKES IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER.

WE DO HAVE AN ENTRY PLAN.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT THIS IS DRAWING A DISTINCTION.

SO IF THIS WERE UP AT THE FEC SITE, THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT.

SO I THINK WE SIMPLY LEAVE IT AT 65 FEET AND IT OF COURSE, IS SUBJECT TO DESIGN STANDARDS BASED UPON WHERE IT'S LOCATED, AND THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS, I THOUGHT, STEPPED IT DOWN ALONG KING STREET.

YES, THEY DO, BUT THEY DO REQUIRE FRONT THAT IT BE UP ON THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN YOU'RE RIGHT, STEPPED DOWN AND STEPPED UP AS YOU GO BACK.

YES. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I'D ALSO LIKE TO NOTE THAT BASED ON THE CONVERSATION THAT WE HAD IN JULY, IN JULY, I ALREADY CHANGED THE SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT CAME OUT OF THAT INCLUDED THE REFERENCE TO THE LAUNDRY PACKAGE PLANT, THE HOTEL MOTELS AND CONVENTION CENTERS AND THE SERVICE STATIONS.

SO IF I CAN RESPOND TO THE COMMENT ABOUT SOME OF THOSE OTHER USES THAT WERE BROUGHT UP IN PUBLIC, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE A MIXTURE OF USES AT A NEIGHBORHOOD SCALE.

SO WE CONTINUED A LOT OF THE USES THAT ARE IN OUR OTHER COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

THE VICE MAYOR HAS MADE, I THINK, AN EXCELLENT RECOMMENDATION THAT WE CLARIFY AND I THINK IT'S PARTICULARLY GERMANE TO RESTAURANTS.

ACTUALLY, I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY THAT NONE OF THESE USES WOULD HAVE DRIVE-IN. OKAY, IT'S IN THERE.

IT'S THERE FOR THE RESTAURANTS.

IT'S NOT THERE FOR THE BANKS.

IT IS FOR THE RESTAURANTS UNDER 3F.

IT NEEDS TO BE THERE UNDER K, BUT OF COURSE, I WONDER ABOUT A DRIVE IN LIQUOR STORE.

WELL, THERE'S ONE THERE ALREADY.

I THINK WE.

I THINK WE OPERATE UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE DRIVE INS.

I THINK THAT THE IDEA WAS NOT SO MUCH.

YEAH. THE IDEA WAS TO TRY TO REDUCE THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS--ANYWHERE WE CAN WE SHOULD BE TRYING TO DO THAT.

THAT WAS MY PHILOSOPHY, AND IT'S QUEUING; IT'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

YEAH. OH YEAH. THE LAST THING.

COULD YOU CLARIFY THE QUESTION MRS. [INAUDIBLE] RAISED ABOUT THE PATHWAYS.

I MEAN PERVIOUS SURFACES THAT'S THE CURRENT IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CAN OR PERVIOUS SURFACES.

IF IT'S IMPERVIOUS IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONCRETE OR SOMETHING HARD, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR PERVIOUS SURFACES THAN IT NEEDS TO ALLOW DRAINAGE THROUGH.

THEIR CITY HAS CERTAIN STANDARDS FOR PERVIOUS CONCRETE PAVERS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THOSE ARE STATED ELSEWHERE IN THE CODE CURRENTLY.

RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THE ONLY I DON'T KNOW, MISS LOPEZ, IF THERE'S ANYTHING WE CAN DO IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE ABOUT SHORT TERM RENTALS [INAUDIBLE] CANNOT UNFORTUNATELY, THAT IS ONCE AGAIN THAT STATE PREEMPTION.

JUST SO I UNDERSTAND IT'S CLEAR TO ME, MAYBE IT'S CLEAR TO ALL OF YOU THAT THERE'S THREE CURRENT DISCUSSION POINTS OF CHANGES.

ONE IS TO REDUCE ALL THE REFERENCES TO 75 FEET, TO REDUCE IT TO 65.

THE SECOND ONE WAS TO REMOVE THE DISTINCTION AT SECTION NINE BETWEEN ENTRY CORRIDOR AND NON ENTRY CORRIDOR.

THAT SIMPLY ENTRY CORRIDORS.

IF THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN AN ENTRY CORRIDOR, IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH ENTRY CORRIDOR.

IF NOT, THEN THERE'S THAT STEP DOWN LANGUAGE, AND THEN THE THIRD WAS TO THIS ONE I DIDN'T COMPLETELY CATCH.

IT WAS TO REMOVE ALL DRIVE THRU USES, WHETHER IT'S A BANK OR A RESTAURANT OR ANY OTHER.

NO DRIVE THRUS.

DID I HEAR THAT CORRECTLY? YES. THE ONLY OTHER THING THAT I WOULD SAY IS.

I'M VERY ANXIOUS AND WOULD REALLY LOVE TO SEE AT OUR NEXT MEETING DETAILED DEFINITIONS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THIS REALLY FAIRLY NEW LANGUAGE THAT WE'RE SEEING THESE MAY WE'LL ALSO FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE LANGUAGE REQUIRING THE PARKING GARAGE. YES.

[02:25:03]

A QUICK COMMENT PARTLY IN REFERENCE TO ONE OF THE SPEAKERS.

YES. THANK YOU. SORRY, IT'S GETTING LATE.

IT'S PAST MY BEDTIME. SORRY, AND THAT.

IS THAT WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT IN MAKING SUGGESTIONS AND I THINK SOME OF MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AT OUR FIRST READING WAS THAT THIS SHOULD BE ORIENTED. THIS ZONING CATEGORY SHOULD BE ORIENTED TOWARD RESIDENTIAL, AND THEN PROMOTING THE RETURN OF RESIDENTIAL SERVICES BACK TO OUR DOWNTOWN AND WEST AUGUSTINE AREAS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CAR TRIPS.

SO A GYM WITHIN A BUILDING WITH LOTS OF MULTIFAMILY, A DAYCARE CENTER, THOSE ARE I THINK THOSE ARE GOOD THINGS TO HAVE. I HAD TO THINK ABOUT THE VETERINARY PART, BUT, YOU KNOW, MOST PEOPLE NOW HAVE PETS.

YOU KNOW, LOTS OF PEOPLE DO.

SO RIGHT THERE, YOU'RE REDUCING ANOTHER CAR TRIP.

SO I WELCOME THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE ELIMINATED THE USES SUCH AS THE DRY CLEANING WITH ALL THE CHEMICALS, HOTELS, MOTELS, CONFERENCE CENTERS AND SERVICE STATIONS.

BECAUSE THOSE ARE NOT MEANT FOR RESIDENTIAL.

THEY ARE NOT TYPICALLY USED MOSTLY BY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS.

SO I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THIS ORDINANCE ON SECOND READING WITH THE F OUR CHANGES WITH THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE ARTICULATED.

NUMBER ONE IS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMP PLAN.

YES. WHICH MEANS THAT THE PARKING STRUCTURE'S A REQUIREMENT THAT 65 FEET IS THE MAXIMUM.

CORRECT, THAT WE ELIMINATE ANY REFERENCE OR THAT WE PROHIBIT ANY TYPE OF DRIVE IN RETAIL FACILITY , AND THEN IT WAS THE REMOVING THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ENTRY CORRIDOR AND NON ENTRY CORRIDOR TO SIMPLY SAY IF YOU'RE AN ENTRY CORRIDOR, YOU MUST COMPLY WITH ENTRY CORRIDOR. IF YOU'RE NOT, THEN YOU HAVE TO DO THE STEP DOWN THAT'S ALREADY INCLUDED IN THAT LANGUAGE.

COUPLED WITH THE CHANGES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, AND THEN AS A SEPARATE REQUEST, THE DIRECTION ABOUT DEFINITIONS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS, AND THAT WOULD BE A SEPARATE ORDINANCE IN THE FUTURE.

YES. SO I WOULD MAKE THAT MOTION AND I WOULD SECOND IT.

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022-15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 28 TWO OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE TO PROVIDE A DEFINITION FOR MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED TERMS. TO ADD REFERENCE TO MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT MOD TO SECTION 28 141 ZONING DISTRICTS AND ZONING ATLAS TO ADD REFERENCE TO MOD ZONING DISTRICT INTO SECTION 28-142 B COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS TO CREATE SECTION 28-210 MOBILITY ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT MOD ZONING DISTRICT PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN CHAPTER 28 ZONING OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, IS THERE FURTHER DEBATE OR DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

MUCH. THE RESOLUTION PASSES.

I WOULD NOW MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DIRECT STAFF TO AT ITS FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO PREPARE DETAILED DEFINITIONS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE TECHNICAL LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN THE COMP PLAN AND OR THE NEW ZONING CLASSIFICATION. IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT.

FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY I APPRECIATE YOU ADDING THOSE EXTRA THINGS, AND EVEN THOUGH I'M STILL HUNG UP ON 55 [INAUDIBLE].

THANK YOU, OKAY, THANK YOU.

I DO THINK IT MADE IT BETTER AND I THINK WE STILL HAVE WORK TO DO.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MS. SKINNER WE ARE NOW ON ITEM 9(A)(1) ORDINANCE 2022-03.

[9.A.1. Ordinance 2022-03: Adopts a new future land use designation for Flagler Crossing property including 50 units as "affordable". (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

IT IS AN INTRODUCTION IN FIRST READING FOR THE AMENDED ORDINANCE 2022-03 TO CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FROM RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY

[02:30:02]

THIS PROJECT IS KNOWN AS FLAGLER CROSSING.

THE PROPOSED USE OF THE PROPERTY HAS CHANGED FROM A SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION TO MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.

THEY ARE ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL DENSITY.

THE PROPOSED USE WOULD ALLOW UP TO 16 UNITS PER ACRE.

THE AMENDED ORDINANCE INCLUDES IN REFERENCE TO A SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION IN THE TITLE.

SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE REINTRODUCING THIS ORDINANCE.

WE ADDED A REFERENCE TO A SITE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE IN THE TITLE.

SO EARLIER WE HAD ADOPTED A SIMILAR ORDINANCE, BUT BECAUSE OF THIS, THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT WE'RE BASICALLY STARTING OVER.

RIGHT, WE NEVER ADOPTED THAT ORDINANCE, SO THIS IS ANOTHER RE-INTRODUCTION OF AN AMENDED ORDINANCE THAT REFERS TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND IT ADDS ASTERISKS LANGUAGE TO THE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT TO REFER THE REQUIREMENT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT , AND IF WE WERE NOT ABLE TO STRIKE A SATISFACTORY AGREEMENT WITH THE DEVELOPER, THIS WOULD JUST DIE ON THE VINE.

THAT'S CORRECT. AT THE NEXT MEETING IF YOU MOVE THIS FORWARD, AT THE NEXT MEETING, YOU WOULD HAVE THE SECOND READING IN PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ORDINANCE. YOU WOULD HAVE THE SECOND READING IN PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ZONING ORDINANCE, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

COMMISSIONERS? I MOVE THAT WE PASS ORDINANCE 2022-03 ON FIRST READING, AND I WOULD SECOND THAT.

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022-03 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO RECLASSIFY A PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 42.36 UPLAND ACRES LOCATED WEST OF THE FEC RAILWAY, SOUTH OF SAN SEBASTIAN VIEW AND EAST OF THE SAN SEBASTIAN RIVER IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AFTER FROM RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY MIXED USE TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY, INCLUDING A SITE SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT REQUIRES A NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS BE AFFORDABLE AS DEFINED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AS AN ASTERISKS ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND PROVISIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I JUST HAD A QUESTION.

OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE PASS THE EARLIER ITEM THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, THESE NUMBERS WOULD BE CHANGED.

CORRECT. THANK YOU.

FURTHER DISCUSSION, FURTHER QUESTIONS.

IF NOT, MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THE ORDINANCE PASSES ON FIRST READING.

MS. SKINNER WE'RE ON ITEM 9(A)(2) ORDINANCE 2022-28.

[9.A.2. Ordinance 2022-28: Amends the Future Land Use Designation of 3 Nesbit Avenue from Industrial to Residential Medium Density. (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

THIS RELATES TO 1.64 ACRES OF PROPERTY ON NESBIT AVENUE, SOUTH OF EWING STREET AND WEST OF THE SAN SEBASTIAN RIVER.

THE PROPOSED LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT WOULD CHANGE THE LAND USE FROM INDUSTRIAL TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY.

THE NEXT ITEM AS WELL IS THE INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING FOR ORDINANCE 2022-29 TO CHANGE THE ZONING FOR THREE NESBIT AVENUE TO THE COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT.

THE REZONING INCLUDES CHANGING THE ZONING FROM INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING TO RESIDENTIAL GENERAL ONE.

I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

I DON'T, BUT DO WE NEED ANY MORE EXPLANATIONS FOR THE MOTIVATION? WHAT THE DEVELOPERS.

THESE PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED INDUSTRIAL FOR PROBABLY 40 YEARS.

THE HOUSING COALITION OWNS THE PROPERTY.

THEY ARE TRYING TO MOVE FORWARD TO DEVELOP AN KIND OF AN ANNEX TO WHAT THEY DO OVER THERE , AND THEY ARE LOOKING TO CHANGE IT TO MULTIFAMILY.

THEY'RE PROPOSING SOME SORT OF COTTAGE COMMUNITY TO EXTEND THEIR SERVICES INTO THIS AREA.

I JUST THINK THIS IS A WIN WIN ON MULTIPLE LEVELS.

I DO, TOO, AND I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ON FIRST READING.

YES, CORRECT. THE MOTION.

I'M GOING TO SECOND IT. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022.

OH, I'M SORRY.

DO YOU WANT ME TO WAIT AND HAVE YOUR DISCUSSION FIRST?

[02:35:01]

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022-28 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP [INAUDIBLE] DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.64 ACRES LOCATED AT THREE NESBITT AVENUE IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE.

AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AFTER FROM ITS CURRENT DESIGNATION OF INDUSTRIAL TO A DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

YES. SO I DO SUPPORT THIS.

I REGRET LOSING INDUSTRIAL ZONING, ALTHOUGH I HAVE TO WONDER WHAT OUR CITY PLANNERS WERE THINKING WHEN THEY DESIGNATED IT OVER THERE.

THAT'S THE CRAZIEST PLACE I'VE EVER HEARD OF FOR IT, BUT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU NEVER GET THAT BACK.

YOU KNOW, YOU NEVER GET THE INTENSE STUFF BACK BUT MY CONCERNS CENTER AROUND FLOODING AND BECAUSE IT'S REALLY FLOODED OVER THERE AND YOU KNOW IS IT GOOD PLANNING TO CHANGE OUR COMP PLAN FOR THIS SORT OF SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT IN A VERY LOW FLOODED AREA? I MEAN, IT'S NOT REALLY SUSTAINABLE.

I DON'T KNOW.

SO I GUESS MY QUESTION WOULD BE, ALTHOUGH I WILL VOTE FOR THIS, YOU KNOW, I STILL LIKE I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PUBLIC BENEFIT, THE COMPATIBILITY.

IS THERE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE FOR IT WHEN I MADE THESE DECISIONS, BUT YOU KNOW, WHAT ASSURANCES CAN WE HAVE THAT THESE WILL BE BUILT IN A RESILIENT MANNER THAT WILL KEEP THESE FAMILIES SAFE FROM FLOODING? ANY STRUCTURES NEED TO MEET THE BUILDING CODES AT THE TIME, AND IF THEY ARE IN A FLOOD ZONE, THEN THEY NEED THEIR FINISHED FLOORS, NEED TO BE AT THE RIGHT HEIGHT, WHICH IS ONE FOOT ABOVE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

SO THEY WILL NEED TO MEET CODE.

YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

IT'S ADJACENT TO THE RIVER AND RIVERINE ENVIRONMENT THAT BUT IN GENERAL, THIS AREA IS AT LEAST HIGHER THAN THE DOWNTOWN OR OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY.

WELL, I DO THINK IN THE FUTURE WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT OUR COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS WE REALLY DO NEED TO BE MORE THOUGHTFUL ABOUT IS THIS REALLY AN AREA WE WANT TO SEE MORE LIKE PRETTY COMPACT SINGLE FAMILY UNITS? THIS BRINGS ME BACK TO A NEAR AND DEAR CONVERSATION.

IF THERE'S EVER A PLACE BUILDINGS NEED TO BE BUILT SUCH WAY THEY CAN BE LIFTED LATER.

THIS WOULD BE ONE THAT'S AS SIMPLE AS BUILDING ONE, PIERS.

WE NEED TO ENCOURAGE THAT BECAUSE THEY WILL NEED TO BE LIFTED AND MAYBE SOMEDAY TRANSPORTED ELSEWHERE.

JUST FOR MY OWN KNOWLEDGE, IS IT WHEN YOU BUILD ON PIERS, IS THAT MORE COSTLY? IT IS, YES. I AGREE WITH YOU.

THE LONG TERM IS FAR LESS EXPENSIVE.

[INAUDIBLE] THEIR CURRENT CAMPUS IS ON PIERS.

SORRY, THEIR CURRENT CAMPUS.

YEAH, OF COURSE. ALL OLD BUILDINGS, YEAH.

ALL RIGHT, [INAUDIBLE] I DO SUPPORT THIS.

I JUST REALLY THINK WE NEED TO THINK A LITTLE HARDER ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING.

SUPER SIMPLE EXPLANATION.

WHY IS IT MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUILD ON PIERS? THE COST OF LUMBER BECAUSE YOU'RE BUILDING NOW YOU'RE BUILDING YOU'RE BUILDING A FLOOR SYSTEM OUT OF LUMBER AND RIGHT NOW, THE COST OF LUMBER IS, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU START FACTORING HOW MUCH YOU NEED TO BUILD IT CORRECTLY VERSUS THE COST OF CONCRETE AND FILL IT DOES CHANGE DEPENDING ON THE MARKET, UNLESS YOU DO CONCRETE SLABS, WHICH UNLESS YOU USE CONCRETE SLABS, CONCRETE SLABS, BUT YOU DIG, YOU'VE GOT TO BUILD THEM IN SUCH A WAY THEY CAN BE LIFTED. SO THAT TO BE STRUCTURAL, THEY JUST CAN'T LAY ON THE GROUND, RIGHT? OH, NO, I MEANT ON PIERS AND STRUCTURAL PRECAST.

[INAUDIBLE] DOING IT.

FURTHER DISCUSSION? I JUST WANT TO NOTE, RECOGNIZE THAT WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT GOING ON WITHIN THE CITY AND I AM EMPATHETIC TO WHAT PEOPLE SEE WHEN THEY MOVE AROUND THE CITY.

WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, THEY SEE MORE DEVELOPMENT, THEY SEE MORE INTENSITY AND MORE TRAFFIC, AND THIS LOOKS LIKE IT'S ANOTHER BECAUSE IT'S NOW IT'S GREEN SPACE, BUT IT IS ZONED FOR INDUSTRIAL, AND SO WE CAN'T UNDO THE FACT THAT IT IS ZONED FOR DEVELOPMENT, AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT NOTE BECAUSE I AM SYMPATHETIC TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE FEELING OUT THERE.

IT IS A DOWN ZONING, THOUGH.

I THINK THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

EVEN THOUGH WE LOSE THE INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY, I THINK IN THAT AREA IT'S A MUCH NEEDED DOWN ZONING, AND I DEFINITELY ECHO THE VICE MAYOR'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE FLOODING AND I'M IN FAVOR OF IT, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AND PLUS, THIS PROPERTY CAN'T BE SUBDIVIDED, SO THAT IS SOMEWHAT HELPFUL IN THIS

[02:40:07]

OKAY, FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

DID WE HAVE A MOTION AND FORGIVE MY TIRED BRAIN? I READ THE TITLE? MM HMM. ALL RIGHT, WELL, GOOD.

BELIEVE ME, I'VE BEEN THERE.

THANK YOU. ORDINANCE 2022-28 PASSES WE NOW HAVE BEFORE US ORDINANCE 2022-29.

[9.A.3. Ordinance 2022-29: Amends the Zoning of 3 Nesbit Avenue from Industrial and Warehousing (IW) to Residential General-one (RG-1). (A. Skinner, Director Planning and Building)]

SECOND ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022-29 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA, REZONING APPROXIMATELY 1.64 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT THREE NESBIT AVENUE PARCEL ID NUMBER 1044100000 IN THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AFTER FROM ITS CURRENT CLASSIFICATION OF CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE INDUSTRIAL AND WAREHOUSING IW TO THE CITY OF ST AUGUSTINE, CLASSIFICATION OF RESIDENTIAL GENERAL ONE PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES, PROVIDING FOR SEVERANCE OF INVALID PROVISIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION OR DEBATE? SEEING NONE. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THE ORDINANCE PASSES.

MR. REGAN WE ARE ON ITEM 9B RESOLUTIONS AND THIS IS OUR RESOLUTION CONCERNING DEBRIS REMOVAL.

[9.B. Resolutions]

IT'S A KEY PART FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SEEK REIMBURSEMENT UNDER FEDERAL EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS.

WE'VE DONE IT IN THE PAST FOR PRIOR STORMS. IN THE PAST, WE'VE DONE IT AFTER THE STORM.

IN THIS CASE, WE'D LIKE TO PASS THIS IN ADVANCE SO THAT WE CAN MAKE OUR DEBRIS REMOVAL SEAMLESS.

EXCELLENT. I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ADOPT RESOLUTION 2022-35, SECOND.

MOTION AND A SECOND FURTHER DISCUSSION.

SEEING NONE. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

THE RESOLUTION PASSES, MS. SKINNER, BEFORE YOU GET TOO FAR AWAY.

THESE ARE INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT ORDINANCES THAT WE HAD THIS EVENING WHERE WE'RE GETTING MORE COMPLICATED WITH WITH THE INFUSION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ASTERISKS AND EXCEPTIONS AND SO FORTH, AND IT'S REALLY EASY FOR US TO CONCEIVE OF WHAT WE WANT.

IT FALLS TO YOU AND MS. LOPEZ AND OTHERS TO PUT IT ON PAPER SUCH THAT WE'RE GOING TO UNDERSTAND IT 80 YEARS HENCE, AND I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT THAT IS, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK.

MS. LOPEZ'S HARD WORK TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS, AND SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

MS. LOPEZ, ITEM BY CITY ATTORNEY.

NONE. MS.

[12.A. Request for three appointments to the Planning and Zoning Board (PZB). (D. Galambos, City Clerk)]

I HAVE. MY FIRST ONE IS A REQUEST FOR THREE APPOINTMENTS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

WE ADVERTISED IN ACCORDANCE TO OUR POLICIES.

I RECEIVED THREE APPLICATIONS, SO IT KIND OF MAKES IT A LITTLE EASY.

MICHAEL DAVIS, CURRENT BOARD MEMBER.

ASHLEY BARNES, ESQUIRE, AND MATTHEW SCHAEFER ARE OUR APPLICANTS AND WE HAVE THREE POSITIONS.

OKAY, COMMISSIONERS.

I WOULD MOVE FOR ACCEPTING ALL THREE APPLICANTS.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WHILE I THINK THAT THESE APPLICANTS ARE QUALIFIED AND I'M HAPPY TO SECOND THE MOTION INTRODUCED BY COMMISSIONER HORVATH, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME COMPETITION FOR THESE TYPES OF SEATS.

PZB IS A VERY IMPORTANT BODY, AND I JUST AM A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED--NOT DISAPPOINTED--IT'S A LOT OF WORK, AND I UNDERSTAND WHY PEOPLE WOULD WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO TO JUMP IN, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE WHO THINK THEY MIGHT WANT TO TRY TO GET MORE INVOLVED, TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT STEP AND APPLY FOR ANY OF THESE OPEN SEATS, AND I ALSO THINK IT IS INCUMBENT UPON OURSELVES AS A MEMBER OF THE

[02:45:08]

I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE FOR 15 YEARS THAT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED AN EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNT OF APPLICATIONS THE FIRST TIME.

SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE.

YOU'VE ALREADY DONE THAT, I BELIEVE, AND YOU'VE SECONDED.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. THE THREE APPLICANTS ARE APPROVED.

[12.B. Request for two appointments to the St. Augustine Police Officers' Retirement Board. (D. Galambos, City Clerk)]

WE ADVERTISED ACCORDINGLY AND WE RECEIVED TWO APPLICATIONS, AND BOTH ARE CURRENT BOARD MEMBERS AND BOTH ARE ELIGIBLE FOR REAPPOINTMENT.

DANIEL HILBERT AND MARY JANE LYLES.

GREAT. EXCELLENT.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THESE TWO APPOINTMENTS.

SECOND. I HAVE A SECOND.

FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. THEY'RE APPOINTED.

MS. GALAMBOS, ANYTHING ELSE? I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR.

[13. ITEMS BY CITY MANAGER]

SO TONIGHT, AS THIS MEETING HAS BEEN TAKING PLACE, WE'RE USING A DIFFERENT AND NEW TECHNOLOGY TO PROTECT THE SEAWALL THAT IS STILL LOW, UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CITY BETWEEN THE MARINA AND THE SANTA MARIA, WE HAVE A PROJECT FOR LONG TERM REPLACEMENT, BUT HISTORICALLY WE'VE BEEN PLACING 1500 SANDBAGS IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT SECTION NOT SO LOW THAT ON MULTIPLE TIDE CYCLES, THE ROAD FLOODS.

SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING, BUT LATE THIS AFTERNOON, RIGHT AROUND 5:00 AND WE WENT STRAIGHT INTO INSTALLATION, WE HAVE CONSTRUCTED A INFLATABLE DAM THAT'S INFLATED WITH WATER ALONG THE [INAUDIBLE].

YEAH, AND IT SO WHETHER ON YOUR WAY HOME OR TOMORROW, WE HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT THAT.

IT'S SOMETHING NEW AND DIFFERENT.

IT SAVES A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF EFFORT.

I'VE BEEN MONITORING THE CONSTRUCTION DURING THE MEETING AND ABOUT 3 HOURS IS COMPARED TO A FULL CREW.

I KNOW IT'S AMAZING.

SO HATS OFF TO NOT ONLY OUR UTILITY WORKERS THAT ARE OUT THIS EVENING PREPARING FOR THE STORM, BUT ALSO THE VENDOR SUPPLIED TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND WORK HAND-IN-GLOVE WITH OUR STAFF TO GET THE TIGER DAM UP THIS EVENING.

SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE BOTH THOSE GROUPS A SPECIAL SHOUT OUT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. REGAN, DO YOU ANTICIPATE THE NEED FOR A SPECIAL MEETING ASSOCIATED WITH THE STORM OR DO YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY HAVE? WE ARE STRUCTURES ARE IN PLACE.

I THINK WE'RE FINE. WE HAVE THE STRUCTURES IN PLACE.

I THINK EARLIER TODAY I'D HAVE TO ASK CHIEF APPELLEES, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS THE CHAIR FOLLOWED AND MODELED THE STATE DECLARATION OF AN EMERGENCY.

SO I THINK WE'RE OKAY AND BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY KEEP YOUR APPRIZED IF WE NEED A SPECIAL MEETING.

[14. ITEMS BY MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS]

I HAVE NONE. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER BLONDER.

YOU KNEW I WOULD. [CHUCKLING] SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT BASED ON OUR DISCUSSIONS OF TONIGHT PREVIOUSLY, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A BIT OF A DISAGREEMENT ON SOME ELEMENTS OF OUR CURRENT AND FUTURE GROWTH AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT AND I THINK WE'VE EVEN DISCUSSED THIS PREVIOUSLY, THAT IT MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME TO REVISIT AND PERHAPS UPDATE OUR VISION PLAN SO THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE MOVING FORWARD, AND I WANTED TO KNOW IF THERE MIGHT BE SOME SUPPORT FOR THAT AND WORKSHOP FORM OR WHATEVER TO ENVISION HOW WE MOVE FORWARD IN OUR FUTURE GROWTH AND HOW WE CONSERVE GREEN SPACE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT PRIORITIES, DENSITY, INFILL.

ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE THINGS THAT I THINK WE SHOULD GRAPPLE WITH TOGETHER AND COME TO A COMMON VISION.

I THINK A WORKSHOP WOULD BE IN ORDER TO TALK ABOUT THESE THINGS.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S SPECIFIC TO UPDATING THE VISION BECAUSE I THINK IT'S WORKING PRETTY WELL, BUT IF WE GET SOME COMPONENTS THAT REFRESH IT, THAT'S FINE , BUT THERE'S A LOT TO TALK ABOUT AND WE CAN'T TALK OUTSIDE OF THIS MEETING.

SO YEAH, I MEAN, I KNOW, I MEAN, INDUSTRIAL ALLOWS ESSENTIALLY A CHEMICAL PLANT FOR STORAGE OF OF CHEMICALS, CHEMICALS THAT ARE FLAMMABLE. SO I THINK THAT'S I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING.

DO WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE SOME OF THESE ALLOWABLE USES CONTINUE IN OUR CODE? SO YEAH, THAT'S THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING.

I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S ALWAYS CONCERNED ME FROM BEING ON PZB FOR YEARS, WE HAVE A LOT OF ZONING CATEGORIES THAT ARE BASICALLY LANDMINES.

[02:50:09]

THEY ARE A PROBLEM UNTIL SOMEONE SAYS, HEY, I WANT TO DO THAT AND IT BECOMES A REAL PROBLEM, AND THE OTHER THING IS, YOU KNOW, THIS CITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, THE WORLD IN WHICH WE LIVE IN, AS IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN, IS FOREVER EVOLVING, AND YOU'RE RIGHT, THE FACT THAT WE CAN ONLY SIT IN PUBLIC AND DISCUSS THESE THINGS IS A HINDRANCE, AND I THINK I WOULD SUPPORT THAT, BARBARA.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA, BUT MADAM MAYOR ELECT, IT SEEMS TO ME IT WOULD BE MOST PROFITABLE FOR IT TO OCCUR AFTER THE ELECTION.

WE'LL HAVE TWO NEW COMMISSIONERS.

IT SEEMS TO ME IT WOULD BE A GREAT WAY TO ACCLIMATE THEM, BRING THEM UP TO SPEED.

WITH THE ISSUES THAT WE'RE FACING, AND IN PART, I ALMOST DIDN'T INTRODUCE THIS IDEA AT THIS MEETING TONIGHT BECAUSE OF WHAT WE HAVE FACING US WITH HURRICANE IAN.

SO I WOULD AGREE, I THINK WE CAN POSTPONE IT, BUT IT WOULD BE WELL INFORMED TO HAVE THE TWO VOICES THAT WILL NOT BE ON THE COMMISSION ANY LONGER, BUT INFINITELY MORE TO HAVE THE TWO NEW VOICES.

THAT'S TRUE, TOO, AND JUST I WANT TO EXTEND MY SUPPORT AND THOUGHTS TO ALL OF THE ALL OF THE STAFF FROM EMERGENCY SERVICES ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE UTILITIES AND EVERYBODY ELSE DOING THE HARD WORK TO PREPARE US FOR THIS HURRICANE AND TO HELP US RECOVER FROM IT, AND PLEASE STAY SAFE, EVERYONE.

THANK YOU, AND I WOULD SAY DITTO.

NO OTHER COMMENTS.

THANK YOU. VICE MAYOR.

I HAVE NOTHING ELSE EITHER.

WE WILL STAND ADJOURNED.

THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.